The Myth of a Good Education

[Eriny]

Don't really see why you are qualified to make this post actually.

Since when does someone need a qualification to make a post other than basic literacy and access to a computer?

[Pappa-Bohr]

Wow Eriny you're either an idiot, or you're a.., not wait yes it's confirmed you are an idiot.
Lets first separate out the two types of university students, those who do proper subjects, and those who are conned into doing 'Arts'.
Now lets look at the former category first:
Several thousand students graduate each year and enter the job market, whether it be in law or finance or science or whatever, and there is a huge information asymmetry problem, firms wants to hire the most intelligent/competent people, but everyone has an incentive to say that their 'the smartest most competent person', thus merely asking them to answer 'tell us why we should hire you' type questions is useless, everyone will lie.

i.e Although the students may know their own level of intelligence/competency, from the point of view of the firms, this information is hidden.

How do student's go about revealing this information? Answer, they use signaling (see Michael Spence (1973). "Job Market Signaling" http://www.jstor.org/pss/1882010).

Why do you think Hedge funds and investment banks hire Maths and physics PhD's? Hint: it's not because they know anything about financial markets.

(It pretty much boils down to the fact unintelligent peoples cannot accomplish H1's in hard subjects, thus getting a H1 in a hard/proper subject signals that your not an idiot)

The real world evidence strongly supports this view, academic transcript serve as the primary criterion for determining PhD or post grad funding/admissions, (Funding for Masters scholarships at Melb uni is literally determined by ranking students in terms of their grades), likewise, applicants to big companies (Law firms, banks, etc) are automatically listed (the application is usually done online) in order of their grades.

Now, of course, high grades are not a sufficient condition for a successful graduate placement, other hidden information, like 'communication skills' must also be signaled (this is usually done by asking for a photo, fobs will be screened out here ).

Now lets consider the latter category: 'Arts' (think gender studies, social work studies, creative writing, philosophy, Eng Lit, etc).
Oh wait, by the very fact you were conned into taking this stuff signals you are not suitable for a position in which one has to make decisions of any consequence.

[Hutchoo]

I smell a faggot ^ That was a total waste of 20 seconds of reading.

[Eriny]

Wow Eriny you're either an idiot, or you're a.., not wait yes it's confirmed you are an idiot.
Lets first separate out the two types of university students, those who do proper subjects, and those who are conned into doing 'Arts'.
Now lets look at the former category first:
Several thousand students graduate each year and enter the job market, whether it be in law or finance or science or whatever, and there is a huge information asymmetry problem, firms wants to hire the most intelligent/competent people, but everyone has an incentive to say that their 'the smartest most competent person', thus merely asking them to answer 'tell us why we should hire you' type questions is useless, everyone will lie.

i.e Although the students may know their own level of intelligence/competency, from the point of view of the firms, this information is hidden.

How do student's go about revealing this information? Answer, they use signaling (see Michael Spence (1973). "Job Market Signaling" http://www.jstor.org/pss/1882010).

Why do you think Hedge funds and investment banks hire Maths and physics PhD's? Hint: it's not because they know anything about financial markets.

(It pretty much boils down to the fact unintelligent peoples cannot accomplish H1's in hard subjects, thus getting a H1 in a hard/proper subject signals that your not an idiot)

The real world evidence strongly supports this view, academic transcript serve as the primary criterion for determining PhD or post grad funding/admissions, (Funding for Masters scholarships at Melb uni is literally determined by ranking students in terms of their grades), likewise, applicants to big companies (Law firms, banks, etc) are automatically listed (the application is usually done online) in order of their grades.

Now, of course, high grades are not a sufficient condition for a successful graduate placement, other hidden information, like 'communication skills' must also be signaled (this is usually done by asking for a photo, fobs will be screened out here ).

Now lets consider the latter category: 'Arts' (think gender studies, social work studies, creative writing, philosophy, Eng Lit, etc).
Oh wait, by the very fact you were conned into taking this stuff signals you are not suitable for a position in which one has to make decisions of any consequence.

lol. Are you just trolling?

In my initial post, the people being rejected for jobs despite having great marks were law students. Further, I don't see what the point of attacking me/my subjects is.

[Glockmeister]

Wow Eriny you're either an idiot, or you're a.., not wait yes it's confirmed you are an idiot.
Lets first separate out the two types of university students, those who do proper subjects, and those who are conned into doing 'Arts'.
Now lets look at the former category first:
Several thousand students graduate each year and enter the job market, whether it be in law or finance or science or whatever, and there is a huge information asymmetry problem, firms wants to hire the most intelligent/competent people, but everyone has an incentive to say that their 'the smartest most competent person', thus merely asking them to answer 'tell us why we should hire you' type questions is useless, everyone will lie.

i.e Although the students may know their own level of intelligence/competency, from the point of view of the firms, this information is hidden.

How do student's go about revealing this information? Answer, they use signaling (see Michael Spence (1973). "Job Market Signaling" http://www.jstor.org/pss/1882010).

Why do you think Hedge funds and investment banks hire Maths and physics PhD's? Hint: it's not because they know anything about financial markets.

(It pretty much boils down to the fact unintelligent peoples cannot accomplish H1's in hard subjects, thus getting a H1 in a hard/proper subject signals that your not an idiot)

The real world evidence strongly supports this view, academic transcript serve as the primary criterion for determining PhD or post grad funding/admissions, (Funding for Masters scholarships at Melb uni is literally determined by ranking students in terms of their grades), likewise, applicants to big companies (Law firms, banks, etc) are automatically listed (the application is usually done online) in order of their grades.

Now, of course, high grades are not a sufficient condition for a successful graduate placement, other hidden information, like 'communication skills' must also be signaled (this is usually done by asking for a photo, fobs will be screened out here ).

Now lets consider the latter category: 'Arts' (think gender studies, social work studies, creative writing, philosophy, Eng Lit, etc).
Oh wait, by the very fact you were conned into taking this stuff signals you are not suitable for a position in which one has to make decisions of any consequence.

PhD doesn't equal smart.

[Eriny]

"PhD's" especially don't.

[ninwa]

The final paragraph of your rant renders that entire post worthless.

Anybody who honestly believes that subjects falling into the category of arts are useless clearly desperately lacks true intelligence and has an extremely narrow, sheltered worldview. Therefore, their opinions are not worth taking into account.

[zomgSEAN]

hater better be trollin.

[TrueTears]

Wow Eriny you're either an idiot, or you're a.., not wait yes it's confirmed you are an idiot.
Lets first separate out the two types of university students, those who do proper subjects, and those who are conned into doing 'Arts'.
Now lets look at the former category first:
Several thousand students graduate each year and enter the job market, whether it be in law or finance or science or whatever, and there is a huge information asymmetry problem, firms wants to hire the most intelligent/competent people, but everyone has an incentive to say that their 'the smartest most competent person', thus merely asking them to answer 'tell us why we should hire you' type questions is useless, everyone will lie.

i.e Although the students may know their own level of intelligence/competency, from the point of view of the firms, this information is hidden.

How do student's go about revealing this information? Answer, they use signaling (see Michael Spence (1973). "Job Market Signaling" http://www.jstor.org/pss/1882010).

Why do you think Hedge funds and investment banks hire Maths and physics PhD's? Hint: it's not because they know anything about financial markets.

(It pretty much boils down to the fact unintelligent peoples cannot accomplish H1's in hard subjects, thus getting a H1 in a hard/proper subject signals that your not an idiot)

The real world evidence strongly supports this view, academic transcript serve as the primary criterion for determining PhD or post grad funding/admissions, (Funding for Masters scholarships at Melb uni is literally determined by ranking students in terms of their grades), likewise, applicants to big companies (Law firms, banks, etc) are automatically listed (the application is usually done online) in order of their grades.

Now, of course, high grades are not a sufficient condition for a successful graduate placement, other hidden information, like 'communication skills' must also be signaled (this is usually done by asking for a photo, fobs will be screened out here ).

Now lets consider the latter category: 'Arts' (think gender studies, social work studies, creative writing, philosophy, Eng Lit, etc).
Oh wait, by the very fact you were conned into taking this stuff signals you are not suitable for a position in which one has to make decisions of any consequence.

Quite an economist's view on this topic. While you do have some good points, the way you separate those who do arts and those who don't is too harsh. First I agree with you (not entirely) on the fact that people who often get hired by investment banks actually have no knowledge about the financial markets. Take melbourne uni's head of actuarial studies as an example, he was a graduate of MIT with a full score in Pure Mathematics, did not study any commerce related subjects but was immediately hired as the head of actuarial studies. My uncle got a PhD @ melbourne uni for applied mathematics and is now a CEO of a major investment company in Shanghai. This is not to say everyone who does a hard course such as theoretical physics or pure mathematics and ends up with insane grades will be hired, most of the time they will because of what you have said, rather harshly:

(It pretty much boils down to the fact unintelligent peoples cannot accomplish H1's in hard subjects, thus getting a H1 in a hard/proper subject signals that your not an idiot)

Getting good grades is important, especially if you are looking for employment within the fields of investment, banking, risk insurance etc. However, your intelligence is not the only thing which employers will look for, what's the point of being able to predict risk with the most amazing mathematical models if you can't explain in English how your model works and what it predicts exactly?

But your last sentence seems to suggest people who do Arts are not capable individuals. Well certainly if they did Arts (assuming they have no mathematical ability) will never get employed within the financial sector but that does not render them to be unintelligent individuals. They could excel in other areas in which people who do science will never be able to achieve and end up getting employed. Look @ Lang Lang, one of the most predominant pianists of the 21st century, he earns shitloads as a performer, did he accomplish H1 grades @ uni? I don't even think he did any subjects rather practise piano all day. Is he unintelligent? No, his intelligence can clearly be seen through his piano playing. Did he fall into the category of doing Arts at university? Yes, early in his career he studied at the Beijing music conservatory and music falls under the category of Arts.

You could say that most people who were "conned into taking this stuff signals that [they] are not suitable for a position in which one has to make decisions of any consequence." but you certainly can not generalise this and say ALL as counter examples do exist.

[Glockmeister]

The final paragraph of your rant renders that entire post worthless.

Anybody who honestly believes that subjects falling into the category of arts are useless clearly desperately lacks true intelligence and has an extremely narrow, sheltered worldview. Therefore, their opinions are not worth taking into account.

peaking of which, Kevin Rudd had a BA in Chinese Studies.

[andy456]

Wow Eriny you're either an idiot, or you're a.., not wait yes it's confirmed you are an idiot.
Lets first separate out the two types of university students, those who do proper subjects, and those who are conned into doing 'Arts'.
Now lets look at the former category first:
Several thousand students graduate each year and enter the job market, whether it be in law or finance or science or whatever, and there is a huge information asymmetry problem, firms wants to hire the most intelligent/competent people, but everyone has an incentive to say that their 'the smartest most competent person', thus merely asking them to answer 'tell us why we should hire you' type questions is useless, everyone will lie.

i.e Although the students may know their own level of intelligence/competency, from the point of view of the firms, this information is hidden.

How do student's go about revealing this information? Answer, they use signaling (see Michael Spence (1973). "Job Market Signaling" http://www.jstor.org/pss/1882010).

Why do you think Hedge funds and investment banks hire Maths and physics PhD's? Hint: it's not because they know anything about financial markets.

(It pretty much boils down to the fact unintelligent peoples cannot accomplish H1's in hard subjects, thus getting a H1 in a hard/proper subject signals that your not an idiot)

The real world evidence strongly supports this view, academic transcript serve as the primary criterion for determining PhD or post grad funding/admissions, (Funding for Masters scholarships at Melb uni is literally determined by ranking students in terms of their grades), likewise, applicants to big companies (Law firms, banks, etc) are automatically listed (the application is usually done online) in order of their grades.

Now, of course, high grades are not a sufficient condition for a successful graduate placement, other hidden information, like 'communication skills' must also be signaled (this is usually done by asking for a photo, fobs will be screened out here ).

Now lets consider the latter category: 'Arts' (think gender studies, social work studies, creative writing, philosophy, Eng Lit, etc).
Oh wait, by the very fact you were conned into taking this stuff signals you are not suitable for a position in which one has to make decisions of any consequence.

who are you to decide what a 'proper' subject is???

[mystikal]

First thing i will like to say is Eriny, your writing is awesome. Second thing is yea academic transcripts play a part for employment to an extent maybe getting your first serious job when you have no prior experience or those specialists jobs (in the academia field, like research).

But i agree with Eriny, grades are not the essence of getting a job they might not even consider it as a factor sometimes. Like i know for a fact that when 2 people are going for the same job, past experience plays a big part. Also an interview is very important as well to judge character.

[Duck]

peaking of which, Kevin Rudd had a BA in Chinese Studies.

I would rather line up at Centrelink for the rest of my life than be remotely similar to Kevin Rudd.

[kamil9876]

Then you better starve yourself to death because last time I checked Kevin Rudd eats food.

[Eriny]

You could say that most people who were "conned into taking this stuff signals that [they] are not suitable for a position in which one has to make decisions of any consequence." but you certainly can not generalise this and say ALL as counter examples do exist.

I wanted to add that I don't even think that saying "most" arts grads are unsuitable to be in a position of any consequence. Especially if you consider that in North America, Arts is the degree that most people actually get. Policy-makers, diplomats, translators, journalists, etc. tend to be Arts graduates.