Importance of College

[ElementMK]

Our modern world has brought out a frustrating new phenomenon: degree bloat. In the United States, a high school education is becoming obsolete; It is a sign of incompetence to not further one's education. Today, even a two-year associate's degree is considered a waste of time by many.

Why? Are high school graduates incapable of performing modern jobs? Do commonplace jobs truly require a bachelor's (four-year) degree?

I have figured two reasons for this increased degree demand:

A. People are fighting for "low-skilled" jobs along with typical "skilled" careers. Anything that can give one an edge over the competition is helpful.

B. More people are attending college. As the horrors of the bell curve dictate, not everyone should be smart enough to get white-collar jobs. Standards must be raised to account for this.

In my opinion, it's an unwanted evolution of college. Many jobs still offer apprenticeships and on-the-job training. Y'know, classes that will teach one all they'll need to know to perform that job. Sure, it may not give one a variety of careers to choose from, but many degrees are on the other end of the spectrum and teach much too broadly to actually be helpful.

If given a choice that had equal outcomes, I probably would not attend college. While college is meant to be a place for expanding one's mind, it has turned into a crutch for a faltering public education system in the US. Besides, if I want to learn, I prefer studying on the Internet in my underwear to listening to a half-pertinent lecture or (god forbid) taking another desk class. Should I really swallow the idea that I'm somehow stupid because of this?

That aside, do you think we can combat degree bloat and encourage a wider variety of learning and career-building opportunities for young adults? Do we even need to, or should we incorporate more college topics into secondary education?

[Purity4]

There was a time when it was uncommon to stay in public school past 8th grade. High school was more like a trade school and was attended by those looking to gain immediate job skills, much like what college is today. Perhaps this is tied to the infantilizing of our youth. Everything is now taking longer and longer to accomplish.

[Oaktree]

I think that there are very few fields that have any meaning in a college context. Off of the top of my head, I'd say that the humanities are really the only field that require it because they are much more focused on interpretation and theory than other fields. I suppose math and higher level physical science might be worthwhile in college, as they are primarily theoretical. Practical science, computer science, communications, health professions, education, and most other fields would be much more efficiently taught through on-the-job training or possibly technical school.

Degree bloat leads to a problem in which people sometimes must be paid more that their position is worth in order for them to be able to pay off their college loans. Essentially, this means that we have a job force full of people who are technically overqualified. To have to pay your employees more than their job brings in for the company is a very unstable position. I'm no expert in economics, but I imagine it would cause inflation, as the money that those people take in is gradually worth less until it comes close to matching the actual value of their work.

I honestly don't know what the solution to degree bloat would be. Colleges could be more selective about who they admit, but it isn't favorable for them to do so because they get more money when they have more students. Providing fewer student loans would decrease the number of students entering college, but it would also skew applicants in favor of those born to wealthy families, instead of favoring those born with talent and/or intellect. I think this latter option is likely to occur, at least in the private sector, though, because companies can't afford to overpay their employees, so it is the loan providers who will feel the hardship of people not paying back loans. The government tends to ignore budget imbalances like that, so they would probably go on providing loans to people who really shouldn't be going to college. This would probably lend itself to the aforementioned inflation and/or increased taxation. In other words, an all-around bad situation.

If the subjects taught in college remain much the same as they are now and jobs still require college degrees, as opposed to technical school or training, for a variety of fields, the best course would be for colleges to drastically tighten their standards for acceptance. Only those with an academic history of high-achievement should be accepted into colleges; otherwise you just end up with a lot of people who will drop out after freshman year. College drop-outs are a particularly bad problem because there is a binary between having a degree and not having a degree in the work force. If you went to college for a couple of years, but didn't get a degree, you've still got loans to pay, but you don't have the piece of paper that allows you access to better jobs. This leads to the situation I mentioned above of being, in some sense, overqualified. Colleges should really try to prevent drop-outs, but they probably see it as a matter of "whatever we can get" in terms of tuition payments. There really isn't any pressure for them to cut down on it, which is why the pressure must come from the lenders.

[kustirider2]

It's kind of different in England. If you don't go to college, it's hard to find a job. Not because of the education, simply because there are not enough low-skilled jobs out there that don't require a higher than college education (Also they're hard to get at the minute, in my town especially, since no one will hire). So most jobs require quite a high education. Even now people are being rejected for working in McDonalds resturants because they don't have a college/university education.

What is degree bloat? I'm probably not getting this because I'm not American :p

[kattenijin]

I'd love to see a resurgance of "vocational" schools, and apprenticeship programs. I doubt it would happen anytime soon though, as you stated no university degree is equated with being either stupid, or not being... agressive? Not quite the word I want, but either way, "not the kind of person we are looking for".

One thing I'd love to see is a required year in between secondary and tertiary education that involves 4 months in retail, 4 months in food service, and 4 months in hospitality, with a co-current year of community service.

What is degree bloat? I'm probably not getting this because I'm not American :p

This:

Even now people are being rejected for working in McDonalds resturants because they don't have a college/university education.

Perfect example of degree bloat.

[Purity4]

Not being ambitious? Is that the word you were looking for, Kattenijin?

[kattenijin]

Purity4: That too, but more than that.

[fakepeeps7]

Unless you're doing something that requires specialized training at a college or university (such as becoming a lawyer or a doctor), I don't really see the point... at least not from an employment point of view. A degree is just an expensive piece of paper. I know of people who didn't even use their degree because it was basically useless; they later went into another profession that required its own training (such as nursing).

I think too much emphasis is placed on college. If you want to go and expand your mind, that's fine. But I don't see why having a degree (and basically proving you know how to stroke a professor's ego and parrot their words back to them, if my college experience is anything to go by) should be a prerequisite for a job that requires a paper hat.

Unless learning to BS your way through life is an important skill that employers look for...

[Nekowolf]

I would also like to say that, there is another issue.

College can be good, I mean, you can learn stuff. But, is it worth the cost of education? College tuition continues to become more and more expensive; eventually, there is a point where it is not worth it.

[Sunbee]

There's a benefit to people in the workforce already to insist that kids must go to college before entering the workforce: less competition for jobs. Benefits politicians as well by lowering the unemployment rate a little: if you're in school then you're not unemployed. For employers, I suppose there's a benefit in that to graduate college you must be able to follow directions without Mommy and Daddy supervising you, so college grads come pre-screened for ability to show up and perform. Then you have the student loans: a guarantee that the student will stay in the workforce, working, and not be able to quit without first lining up another job even if the employer is not treating them well.

[pinketamine]

I have never really understood the difference between college and university, is there any? Or they are just different words?

[Sunbee]

As I understand it, a college offers a two or four year degree program, leading to an Associate's degree or a Bachelor's degree respectively. A university offers the same types of programs as a college, and in addition offers Masters and Doctorate programs.

[ElementMK]

pinketamine: AFAIK, most colleges teach up to a four-year degree, while universities will usually teach to six years and further. However, there aren't any set rules and you'll see them used interchangeably, especially in international education.

[paksetti]

I skipped college. Going straight to trade school.

If I can afford college later on in life, I'll probably take some art classes, but I'm damn sure not spending thousands of dollars for a pretty piece of paper that supposedly "proves" I'm smart.

[el_flel]

There's a difference, I think, between how the UK and the US define a university and a college. In the UK it mandatory to attend secondary school until you finish aged 16. After that most people go on to college (or sixth form which is part of the secondary school) where you can gain qualifications below undergraduate level, such as A-Levels, NVQs, diplomas, etc. After that there is university which is for undergraduate degrees (which commonly last three years) and postgraduate degrees (masters, doctorates, etc).

I do actually understand what you're talking about, Element Leaf but am not sure I see it as being a problem if I'm honest. I graduate in June and am realising that to even get a basic graduate job that my undergrad degree isn't enough. I either need a shed load of relevant work experience or a postgraduate degree - but surely that's a good thing? That I'm required to extend my knowledge beyond that of which I have been taught. Certain careers require degrees: medicine/healthcare, law, teaching, science. I want to be a psychologist so need at least a BSc, an MSc and a diploma in order to obtain the status I would need to practise. Therefore university is mandatory for me. However, I certainly don't think that all jobs should require a degree - that's just silly. Qualifications are necessary in order to show that someone has a certain level of competence in their particular profession, but that qualification doesn't need to be a degree.

I think it is fantastic that most people are now able to go to university. It means that everyone has that opportunity and it isn't just limited to those who can afford it outright. However, there are many people who go to uni because they think they should or 'for the experience' - an expensive experience! There is no doubt that uni does teach you some really valuable skills - being able to write well, time management, problem solving, analytical skills, critical thinking - that will be useful in whatever career one decides to get into, but there would come a problem that the more people who get degrees, the more a degree starts to become worthless. But then on the flip-side, many people go to university for personal interest and that's just as valid a reason to go as wanting to for career purposes.

I think the biggest problem is that many young adults who graduate have got no work experience and no common sense. My aunt is a lawyer and 99% of the law students who come and work for them for experience are utterly useless. They're certainly book-smart but don't have any experience 'out in the real world'. One guy was asked to print a load of reports, and instead of coming to find someone when the printer ran out of ink he just sat back at his desk and didn't say a thing! I took four years out between finishing my A-Levels and starting uni, and I worked full time in between - I learnt a lot in those four years. I also was working alongside people who were doing the same job as me who had degrees, who didn't really have a choice but to take a job at that level because they'd never worked before!

I don't know if there is anything to do to combat it, or if trying to combat it is even necessary tbh. Perhaps people should be made to talk through their career prospects with an expert before making a decision about what to do with their future?

[dutch]

College is important. No doubt. But to what extent in our world today, that's the question. Our society is steering more and more towards pragmatism, and that means people have to always be in a mad rush, always compete to overtake others in order to secure themselves. From an individualistic perspective, that means getting high qualifications is essential if one wants to aim for a stable income and everything. I'm saying 'aim' here, because possessing respectable qualifications don't necessarily mean you'll be able to actually make something out of it. Competition is brutal these days, and the more demand for jobs there is, the more likely there'll be job shortage. It's a little bit like basic micro-economics.

Qualifications aren't enough anymore, and like firms in a monopolistic competition, people need to find other ways to beautify their records (whether on a superficial level or not) so that they could "sell" themselves. And this is where stuff like experience comes in. If you're actually someone who's handy, active and resourceful in real life, outside the world of textbooks and computer screens, chances are you'll have a generally more promising work life. If you can connect yourself to the pace of the real world, you can keep up and hence have a more sustainable future. Books and colleges and universities and so on are indeed indispensable, but real life exposure is a must. And that's something that can't be taught to you by others most of the time. You gotta move your feet, get out there, initiate, ask questions. Stuff like that. Direct interactions with everything in real life is like memorizing your textbooks in school life, that's what I think.

[WaterWolf]

It's kind of different in England. If you don't go to college, it's hard to find a job. Not because of the education, simply because there are not enough low-skilled jobs out there that don't require a higher than college education (Also they're hard to get at the minute, in my town especially, since no one will hire). So most jobs require quite a high education. Even now people are being rejected for working in McDonalds resturants because they don't have a college/university education.

What is degree bloat? I'm probably not getting this because I'm not American :p

You need 4 GCSE's to get into McDonalds in the UK.

Something dire's on the horizon if these issues aren't resolved, the university riots are just a start. It's all due to the overpopulation of the Earth. Too many people are seeking jobs and not creating jobs, which doesn't balance.

[fakepeeps7]

I have never really understood the difference between college and university, is there any? Or they are just different words?

I think it depends on the country.

Here in Canada, college used to mean a two-year program. Sort of like community college. If you wanted to go further, you'd have to transfer to a university, which had the full four-year programs (as well as masters programs, doctorate programs, etc.).

Now a lot of the colleges offer four-year programs so you can get your bachelor's degree there as well. But I think they're called "university colleges"...

[Oaktree]

It's all due to the overpopulation of the Earth. Too many people are seeking jobs and not creating jobs, which doesn't balance.

Large populations inherently create more jobs. When you have a larger customer base, you need to hire more people to get your product out there. You need to hire more people to make your product, or provide your service. There may be more companies popping up because the one company over there can't provide for this population over here very well, so someone else pops up to fill the need. The demand for products and services is proportionate to the size of the population, with a few other factors, such as affluence, affecting the demand. Job shortages have nothing to do with population size.

[kattenijin]

...Only experts with high degrees are allowed to teach to students ...

I don't know about your country, but here in the US, many courses are taught by Teaching Assistants, not Professors. They are graduate students receiving course credits to their degree. Tecnically, they are supposed to be assisting a Professor (hence the "teching assistant), but usually they are the sole educator in the classroom. This was one of the reasons I had a lot of "discussions" with my academic advisor back when I was at university; because I wanted only those classes taught by an actual Professor, and not a TA. Considering the costs of tuition, I felt I was being entirely reasonable. It was amazing the number of courses that were required for graduation, but were not taught by Professors, only TAs. So, the idea that educators are all experts in their field dosen't hold water over here. May be a reason why our educational standards are dropping.

As for the degree I got in college, not using it at all. Everything I know about my current job, I've learned on the job. There have been many times I've had to pick up the pieces when someone with a degree in the field goes fubar. Having a degree in a particular field dosen't necessairaly make you compentent in that field.

[kattenijin]

All right, if you think you don't need a college degree in mechanical engineering, then I dare you apply for a mechanical engineering job and succeed in it.

My point was that "only experts with high degrees" wasn't always the case. I never said college was useless for all jobs, just that it wasn't necessary for every job, and that a degree in a certain field didn't always mean you were doing a good job. Isn't there a saying along the lines of "those who can, do; those who can't, teach"? Here in New York, there is a big fight going on between politicians, the teacher's union, parents of school children, etc. about how teachers get tenure, if/when they deserve it, and how teachers are evaluated. Granted this is at a primary and secondary level, but a case can be made for tertiary education too. Shouldn't the value of a professor be in how well he/she teaches his/her students over how many papers he/she publishes, and how much research is done? Yet these are some of the kind of things they are ranked on, more so than the kind of education they give.

I don't know where you live, but here in the U.S., we do have academic counselors.

I believe that I mentioned speaking with my advisor/counselor. What is your point exactly?

Edit: I just want to add that I am an American citizen too. Yes, I do agree with you about the TA issue. We are taught by TAs, but not all classes are taught by TAs. TAs may be Teaching Assistants or Teaching Associates. For one chemistry course, I got a Teaching Associate as a lab/recitation instructor and professor/doctor as my lecturer. For my Biology class and History class, I got professors/experts. See? It's a mix between TAs and professors.
I never said that none of my classes were taught by a professor, just that many were by TAs and that it was difficult to get classes with professors over those of TAs and this is part of why I feel education standards are falling in this country. The scariest part, is that while McDonald's wants a college grad as restraunt manager, most of the staff couldn't give correct change without a calculator if the power went out.

[Volvenom]

I don't understand this. If you don't want anything in life I guess learning new things isn't interesting. That makes you ignorant in my eyes.

Part of the thing is the cost as someone has pointed out though. It's almost free here. Private schools is not widely used. So why don't you wanna learn anything? I don't get it.

If you're gonna need your eduacation, no one knows. Actually there is a lot of people walking around who end up with totally different jobs then there eduation would be used for. Most of them will probably say the education they got was a window opener. They got into higher payed jobs that way, and just jumped on it when the possibilities came along. That's just how life is, you have to start somewhere and then you do something else.

[kattenijin]

I don't mean to imply that education isn't good, I still take courses that interest me at the various colleges in my area, it's just that lately it seems that there is an additude that you need to go to college, just for having been to college; that if you don't somehow you are lacking. If you want to be a trades-man (carpenter, plumber, electrician, etc.) I really don't see the need for more than technical school, an OTJ training. And, like I mentioned before, McDonalds wants colege graduates for it's franchise managers, Seriously??!! I can see it for a District manager, but for the "restraunt" manager? Nope.

[unalisaa]

I don't understand this. If you don't want anything in life I guess learning new things isn't interesting. That makes you ignorant in my eyes.

Part of the thing is the cost as someone has pointed out though. It's almost free here. Private schools is not widely used. So why don't you wanna learn anything? I don't get it.

Eh, academia is great if you're into that kind of thing, but not everyone is. It's not about "not wanting to learn", it's about whether or not you want to take the nitpicky, bookish approach to it.

My father dropped out of university with less than half a degree in mechanical engineering. He spends a lot of his time doing things and reading books on subjects that interest him, however. Not attending university =/= being intellectually lazy.

[whiterider]

The problem is that although you can learn huge amounts without ever touching a university application form, you can't really put that knowledge on your CV. Universities give definite knowledge - that is, an employer can look up the university you went to, look at the course, and see that you learnt about this, this, and that and, based on the university's reputation, see that it's almost certain/fairly likely/totally impossible that what you learnt was correct and that you learnt it in a suitably comprehensive and in-depth manner. If your goal is to learn, you don't need university at all: but if your goal is to get a qualification-requiring job, then you do. University is also better than self-teaching for learning skills rather than knowledge, simply because you have a framework in which you can practise with other people and be corrected if you're doing it wrong.

That said, you can work your way up to a graduate job without a degree - but it will take longer, and be more difficult. That's fine if you're not too fussed about the money and the having to make do with something less than what you aim for to begin with.

[kattenijin]

Just out of curiosity, what courses would you want your plumber to be taking at university? It is usually though of as a "blue collar" (read: less skilled than "white collar"/college educated) job, but my friend who is one has the second highest income of everyone I know. (The guy with the highest comes from a monied family, and dosen't reallly work, so...) How is he "suffering" from a lack of education?

Also, as far as job hunting goes, I graduated from college 20 years ago, and my resume has an entire one line about it. I can see how it would be usefull at getting your first or second job, but after that it is usually based on the reviews given by your previous employers.

[fakepeeps7]

Just out of curiosity, what courses would you want your plumber to be taking at university? It is usually though of as a "blue collar" (read: less skilled than "white collar"/college educated) job, but my friend who is one has the second highest income of everyone I know. (The guy with the highest comes from a monied family, and dosen't reallly work, so...) How is he "suffering" from a lack of education?

Around here, plumbers (and other "blue collar" workers such as carpenters, welders, etc.) go to trade school rather than university. They still have to get educated... but their education is more hands-on than someone studying, say, medieval French literature. I wouldn't necessarily say they're less educated. It's just a different type of education.

[kattenijin]

I wouldn't necessarily say they're less educated. It's just a different type of education.

You and I are basically "preaching to the choir", albeit from different angles. I'm aiming more at those people who's immediate reaction was that you needed to go to college to get a good job and make money; that if you didn't have a degree, somehow you would never "make it" in life. I'm still waiting to be proven wrong.

[Purity4]

Kattenijin, re: your signature and the way it's worded, does that mean only 55% of people are equipped with a human brain?

[Lance]

Where I live, most of the "high-level" education goes down to the point you gain a document which states "this man is not a complete idiot, he has brains great enough to operate with the cash and talk to customers in your electronics store".
But to perform real professional jobs, you need to have skills, and the papers means next to nothing there.

[kattenijin]

Kattenijin, re: your signature and the way it's worded, does that mean only 55% of people are equipped with a human brain?

Going by the majority of people I have to deal with every day, the percentage of people equiped with a brain is much, much lower. As to how the percentage was determined, I have no idea; I copied from a sig on another site. I'd assume that things like dyslexia and improper schooling would be contributing factors. After all, how many people have issues with the use of there, their, and they're; or to, too, and two.

Also try shudder/shutter and stutter/studder.

I could go on and on and on and on and on ......

Try this site: http://notalwaysright.com/ It fully explains the human condition.

[Volvenom]

Eduacation goes a little bit further then just spelling and building sentences. We all have a brain, it's just about using it. If you like building stuff, you might find it interesting to learn about different ways of building a house or a staircase. It's all about being able to handle different sets of using the information you have, and find the best solution to your challenge each time. Not just someone give you a book and say "do this". You have been equipped with a brain unless you're brain damaged, use it!

You don't even need a book to learn the different ways, but books has a way of handling down information that a few teachers finds difficult to do on their own.

[geallach]

This is slightly wandering off-topic, but it supports your point. Here we have three types of secondry schools; the ones you pay for, normal ones and technical or vocational ones. In techincal schools, one can do woodwork, mechanical drawing and similar subjects, which are not available in normal secondry schools, but options in other subjects can sometimes be a but narrower. The common perception of them is that if you go to one, you are less educated. I chose to go to the vocational school nearby, because the two normal schools were notorious for the outragously high level of bullying that happened in them. All my parents' friends started telling them that I would get less education and less marks when I graduated, because vocational schools are not equal. They were furious with me. But it was all nonsense. When I took woodwork, I learned a life skill, something that I have put to use a number of times. I gave it up in fifth year, but by the time we graduated, there were boys in my year who could craft beautiful tables and chairs, while the nicest thing I ever made was a spice rack. It took real skill to do it, valuable skills not be dismissed. There is way too much emphasis on science and maths as being the subjects to be judged on; even at college level, the humanities, arts, and technical subjects are considered beneath them. I say if you can do complex mathematics, but can't make a bookshelf, you are no more skilled than someone who is bad at maths, but can build a house and the furniture for it.

[Bailey Weggins]

There's is something I've always wondered and since so many people pointed out that degrees are just a piece of paper one doesn't really need, it seems to be the right place to ask: why do so many graduate programs require undergraduate education? I read on Wikipedia that almost half of all students in med school earn a Bachelor's degree that doesn't even have anything to do with medicine and this applies to law school, too. What a gigantic waste of time and money. In Germany, we go to high school, and the minute we get that diploma run to the university and study medicine or law right away. This way, students get their degree at the age of 24 or 25. Isn't this a better solution?

[el_flel]

^ It's the same way in the UK. I always thought it was a bit of a waste of time in the US to do 4 years at college and then have to go to grad school and do a degree in law or medicine to become a lawyer or a doctor. Why can't you just do those degrees straight off? Surely it takes longer that way to actually get the career you want?

[el_flel]

Was that to me? If so I was talking about American colleges being 4 years.

[whiterider]

4 years of college? Why four? In the UK college is almost always 2 years, then on to university, usually for four or five years for those particularly brain-hurty courses.

[Mistermook]

On the other hand, while it might seem counterintuitive on some level, I'm compelled to note that whatever other failures of the American educational system it seems we're still doing fairly good things in higher education - at least at the top end. So however we're doing things I'm not sure it's a case of "this is broken and we should fix it." Perhaps US students require more fundamental reeducation to assure our standards or something, which would imply that a college education is even more vital in the US than elsewhere?

[el_flel]

I edited because when I read it back it did look like I was talking about the UK!

[whiterider]

D'uh, ofc you were... brain fail there.

[Oaktree]

I'm currently studying biochemistry and philosophy, even though I plan to go to med school. While I have often felt that the things I am studying are only obliquely related to my ultimate academic goals, I am glad to have the opportunity to study these things. I see college as a way to independently expand one's horizons and discover one's interests. I didn't know how much I would love philosophy until I took an introductory ethics class in freshman year. College has completely changed the way I see the world, and I wouldn't change my experiences for anything. While postponing med school until after I get an undergraduate degree means I'll be somewhere around 26-28 when I finish med school, I think that it's worth the time taken in undergrad to mentally mature, gain responsibility, and learn how to juggle a large course load.

[SimPerson]

Degree bloat is a UK problem as well. You now get all sorts of jobs that did not require a degree ten years ago that now do. Its not that the jobs have become more complicated but that there are more people going on to university.

You pick your degree at the age of seventeen and most people at that age are just thinking about the fun they plan to have when they move out of their parents home rather than what they are going to do after univeristy. It results in an awful lot of dissapointment when you end up moving back in with your parents and that degree level job is nowhere to be found. I know several people who feel as though they were "conned" into going to univerisity, espicially with the debt you end up with.

That said its hard to put a price on the non-education side of going to university or college. A lot of people complain that youngsters only go to university for the social life but I have mixed feelings. It certainly gave me to chance to do and experience things I would not have been able to do if I had stayed in my home town. You meet all sorts of interesting people and it broadens your horizons. Its a shame that this sort of experience is not often available to people who don't go on to further education.

[jay_envy]

Are people really bothered by going to university for 4 years? I'm a sophomore in uni and for what I want to do as a career (Anthropologist) I have to go to graduate school. Now that shit is excessive! Eights years of university only to end up getting a measly 70k per year income, and a desk job at some museum.

[Rectos Dominos]

Are people really bothered by going to university for 4 years? I'm a sophomore in uni and for what I want to do as a career (Anthropologist) I have to go to graduate school. Now that shit is excessive! Eights years of university only to end up getting a measly 70k per year income, and a desk job at some museum.
I am not bothered by anyone going to university, it's their life their choice and do whatever makes you happy. However I am bothered with society saying you have to go college and or university and if you don't you're a loser, failure, and/or a dumbass. I am sure most posters here don't have a problem with people choosing to further their education but just don't like the pretentious attitude about weither or not you go to college and how you "have to go".

Many people have gone to college/university not because they wanted to but felt obligated. Society tends to have a black and white view towards college and "if you don't go to college the only job you will be able to get is McDonalds or Wal-Mart".

[SimPerson]

When I was in school there was almost no discussion of options other than going on to university. I think 6th form colleges (16-18 education in the UK) like to be able to boast statistics like 90% of our students went on to university rather than actually helping the students to work out what is the best option for them. I even remember attending a tutorial to "help us decide what to do at university". There was a girl in my class who did not want to go to university and she was treated almost like a "troubled teen" by the teachers. I agree that there is (or at least was) an awful lot of pressure to go to univeristy.

[el_flel]

^ I think there's a belief that students only do A-Levels to get into uni and that on their own they're a worthless qualification (which is nonsense). Also, sixth forms seem to primarily teach A-Levels so I would expect there to be a higher proportion of their students who do on to further education than at a college (which is what I attended). Based on that I can understand that people might be more surprised by a sixth-former who doesn't want to go to uni, but it certainly isn't a bad thing if they don't want to go.