With modern technology, does a college degree even mean what it used to?

  • 🔧 At about Midnight EST I am going to completely fuck up the site trying to fix something.

double magicNum = 0.41;

kiwifarms.net
Joined
Nov 21, 2024
There's a major concept called the "hidden curriculum" – the idea that education not only teaches you explicit facts, skills, and concepts, but forces you to learn skills without you even realizing it. The hidden curriculum includes things like not interrupting people/waiting your turn, conflict resolution, understanding and civilly backing up/debunking various opinions, social conditioning, etc.

Another item that once was a huge part of the hidden curriculum is penmanship. Many states still teach cursive, yet the requirement that you use it in *high school* has almost completely disappeared. In the early 2000s, a small minority of students had typing accommodations if they had psychological motor impairments that affected gripping and manipulating a pen, but not hammering out characters on a keyboard (such as autism). By the 2010s, these accommodations were pretty much rolled out to everyone. No one wrote their essays in cursive. In fact, they COULDN'T. The rule was "12 point font, double-spaced, in Times New Roman... and believe me, I can tell if you mess with the margins or kerning!"

This means that a lot of kids are getting into college without having legible, efficient cursive handwriting. Even if their teacher bans laptops (a ban they can't enforce on the kids who have accommodations), they might just write their notes in a shorthand instead.

And the classes might even post the PowerPoints online.

It's pretty much a rule now that larger lecture halls – the kind you would actually call a lecture hall and not a classroom – have PA systems. This, arguably, encourages people not to practice good listening skills, and for a lot of people, they'd be able to hear the teacher just fine if they exercised concentration AND the students around them didn't stim or type.

This also means that professors themselves are more likely to speak in a vernacular dialect – where "identity" is pronounced "idennidy" – where "gonna" is used heavily and "pants" rhymes with "dance". The concept of affected diction has pretty much fallen by the wayside, especially since speaking across a large hall without a microphone is less common.

College educated people nowadays might only use formal English in essays, and may actually view its use in day to day life as pointless, pretentious, and stunted.

It's also a lot easier to get through college without doing as much long-form reading. The schools have online libraries full of PDFs, and you are more than welcome to use CMD/CTRL-F and other search features instead of using the index and actually READING. If you're writing a brief essay, you might be able to cite even regular websites. You simply won't spend as much time, or any time, in the library. You might even BS your way through a book by just skimming it and including the citations as is, while reading Sparknotes, etc.

The attitude on Wikipedia is also a pretty big part of this. I remember, going into the 2010s, that the general attitude shifted from "Don't use, ever" to "Wikipedia is actually a great resource, and much of the information there is cited to reliable sources, and you should go ahead and use it as a "springboard" to find the information – but don't rely on it or cite it." But think about it – how is that different from using ChatGPT to get you the general information, and then finding the information elsewhere – instead of actually reading a book? It's arguably plagiarism.

But speaking of that – occasionally, you do have a brief response on Canvas these days where you aren't even asked for a source, or are even told by a professor that you don't have to cite your sources – literally reddit tier consensual plagiarism.

Circling back around to listening skills – spending less time in the library means less time in an environment where you're supposed to sit still and keep your voice down. You don't exercise that skill at home, nor in a loud urban starbucks. And much of the library might have actually done away with that rule as if it were sidewalk etiquette – the library has "quiet floors" now, and the rest is basically that urban starbucks.

Also, fewer people are staying in the dorms unless the school literally forces them too. Dorms arguably teach people to adjust their habits 24/7 for others around them, get used to having very little in life, and learn about living in general. It's a preparation for adult life, but one with actually less privacy than you may have in your parents' slab home where walking too quickly isn't obviously stomping.

And ZOOM means "going to college" is like "visiting our website" – you can do it from the same computer you use for masturbating and taxes.
 
I don't think it's just college, as you mentioned high school standards are dropping too when it comes to soft skills. We had profs who were baffled how much difference there was between kids coming from a decade ago to now in regards of soft/social skills. Even we noted that when we were graduating that at the end of the day what this paper represents is that we were able to process a set amount of bullshit for a given time and could keep to deadlines when handling in projects (because 85% of the curriculum was garbage or something you could have learned on the net or the first 6 months on the job). AI will "help" people a lot on this so even these "get shit done in time" skills will also go down the drain. I don't know what colleges will do or what they're supposed to do. They're the end point of education, if people are coming in half baked they can either adapt for them or throw out 95% of the class in the first semester.
 
The attitude on Wikipedia is also a pretty big part of this. I remember, going into the 2010s, that the general attitude shifted from "Don't use, ever" to "Wikipedia is actually a great resource, and much of the information there is cited to reliable sources, and you should go ahead and use it as a "springboard" to find the information – but don't rely on it or cite it." But think about it – how is that different from using ChatGPT to get you the general information, and then finding the information elsewhere – instead of actually reading a book? It's arguably plagiarism.
I'd like to respond to this. I don't agree that Wikipedia is equivalent to ChatGPT in the "enabling laziness" department. I graduated in 2020 and spent the COVID lockdown writing my dissertation. I don't want to self-dox but the subject I wrote about was rather niche. If I had decided to rely entirely on the handful of relevant Wikipedia articles to write it, I would've been fucked. The articles in question provided a great general overview of the topic for laypersons, but it's not a substitute for actual research.

The real cheat sites that saved my ass were Google Books and BASE. I searched a few relevant keywords, instantly found a couple of relevant sources, and that's all I needed to do as far as finding the material I needed for writing it. That's also the real way Wikipedia benefits you in an academic setting, by the way. You don't crib from Wikipedia itself, you scroll down to the 'References' section of the article, see what sources it's citing and go from there. It definitely made that part of things (gathering relevant sources) infinitely easier than it would've been in the pre-Internet days, but I still had to do the legwork of reading said sources. Oh, and actually writing the thing out.

ChatGPT eliminates those parts entirely. For a lark I decided to "re-do" my dissertation earlier this year, but with the generative AI that now exists but didn't even just five years ago. I was genuinely laughing my ass off at how easy it made it. A few well-worded prompts later and boom, ChatGPT had managed to more or less do the work that had taken me fucking months in the span of about two hours. I'm sure if I had just submitted that as-is it would've been flagged by a plagiarism detector, but that wouldn't have taken too long to fix. I'd have spent infinitely more time rewriting it enough to pass if off as original work than I would've done getting ChatGPT to do the hard parts, in any case.

I'm genuinely glad that it didn't exist at the time. The temptation to be lazy and not actually do the work would've been too great.
 
This also means that professors themselves are more likely to speak in a vernacular dialect – where "identity" is pronounced "idennidy" – where "gonna" is used heavily and "pants" rhymes with "dance". The concept of affected diction has pretty much fallen by the wayside, especially since speaking across a large hall without a microphone is less common.

Me and the old boys at the Yale Club were just discussing this very same troubling development over brandies the other day. If any of our professors had ever rhymed 'pants' with 'dance', our fathers would have ensured that they never cross the threshold of a lecture hall in New Haven again.
 
a lot of kids are getting into college without having legible, efficient cursive handwriting
I honestly never understood why anyone gave a shit. We've more or less moved on from needing it. The only time I physically write shit down is to take notes for something that, if it is actually important, ends up typed. If it is double important, I will backup the digital data in a separate location and print a hard copy of the typed document to be stored in a fire safe. Like, can you imagine if shit like birth certificates were still just hand written cursive shit from a doctor? I have my 3x great-grandfather's enlistment papers from the Civil War, originally hand written in cursive by an enlistment officer in ???, Kansas, and the only reason I do have that is because the VA eventually transferred those documents to microfilm and eventually digitized them. Bitching that people are not being taught how to efficiently write documents in cursive, in my opinion, sound like someone bitching about navigators in the Navy no longer being taught how to course correct with an astrolabe.
It's pretty much a rule now that larger lecture halls – the kind you would actually call a lecture hall and not a classroom – have PA systems. This, arguably, encourages people not to practice good listening skills, and for a lot of people, they'd be able to hear the teacher just fine if they exercised concentration AND the students around them didn't stim or type.
Fellas, is society soft and fragile because the school I pay $20,000 a year to go to makes sure I can fucking hear what's being said regardless of where I'm at in the room?
This also means that professors themselves are more likely to speak in a vernacular dialect – where "identity" is pronounced "idennidy" – where "gonna" is used heavily and "pants" rhymes with "dance". The concept of affected diction has pretty much fallen by the wayside, especially since speaking across a large hall without a microphone is less common.
Yeah, it's crazy how English has never changed or evolved to fit the society that uses it in any way whatsoever until the last 200 years. Oh wait, shit. This is called a "living language." The pronunciations and usage of most words you consider "proper" and complain that are being bastardized I'm sure would be strange two hundred years ago, completely incompatible to the English language as it was spoken four hundred years ago, and completely incomprehensible by English speakers six hundred years ago.

There is an argument to be made about making sure people in a country are all brought up speaking the same dialect, and are all getting a proper educational foundation to build on, but advocating for rigid rules to any language is antithetical to the point of a language at all.
The schools have online libraries full of PDFs, and you are more than welcome to use CMD/CTRL-F and other search features instead of using the index and actually READING.
As a historian, I can assure you that Tacitus would've strangled his own mother to death with his father's intestines for a library of Ctrl+F searchable PDFs. Holy shit. By this logic I could argue it's woke and is making people soft by inventing a written language at all, because it is no longer necessary for our Village Elders to remember the Entire History of our People and the World™ and be able to tell it to groups of children. Now they just write it down and anyone can read it! How disgusting! You don't even need to parse regional writing styles or personal penmanship anymore, because they all use a universally recognized type! They've made us weak and soft by making information as accessible as possible to anyone that wants it!
You simply won't spend as much time, or any time, in the library
Thank God.
You might even BS your way through a book by just skimming it and including the citations as is, while reading Sparknotes, etc.
I'm sure "skimming the material and pretending to be an expert" is something that is completely novel to modern society and has never been done before now. Now, imagine a world where that information was not so easily accessible, where you can't call out a bullshitter in the act by pulling out the miracle machine in your pocket and pulling up the text he's citing and, in real time, reveal that he's full of shit and the text does not support his position.
The attitude on Wikipedia is also a pretty big part of this. I remember, going into the 2010s, that the general attitude shifted from "Don't use, ever" to "Wikipedia is actually a great resource, and much of the information there is cited to reliable sources, and you should go ahead and use it as a "springboard" to find the information – but don't rely on it or cite it."
That's because, in the 23 years that Wikipedia has existed, Wikipedia has evolved to become more reliable and scholarly. Notice I didn't say infallible, just more reliable. A lot of articles on it are well sourced, and you can go read the linked sources to further your own research. To give you some perspective, YouTube was created in 2005. If we use your same logic for YouTube, it would be unreasonable to use YouTube as a research tool today by watching videos posted by reliable scholars because in 2005 YouTube was for the Numa Numa Guy and Piano Cat or some shit.
But think about it – how is that different from using ChatGPT to get you the general information, and then finding the information elsewhere – instead of actually reading a book? It's arguably plagiarism.
I have no idea what you're even trying to say. Are you implying that using tools we have today makes research less "real?"

Let me present a hypothetical:
You and I are both writing an article on the same subject, and you go to "the library" (whatever the fuck that means) and physically just start pulling shit off the shelves and reading books about the topic, whereas I use ChatGPT and Wikipedia and Adobe Acrobat and whatever other boogieman you dislike. Assuming we are both allowed the same amount of time for this project, when both articles are submitted to whatever prepublication process we're using, you will, by necessity, be heavily citing a smaller number of sources, and widely unaware of the sources and arguments outside of those that you have read. My article, on the other hand, will have a far more comprehensive list of sources, and I will have a much wider base of information on which to base my conclusions, merely because my research was far more efficient. Would your article have inherently more value than mine because you sat at a library and wrote your article in cursive with quill and parchment even though my article is a far better representation of our complete understanding on the topic?
or are even told by a professor that you don't have to cite your sources – literally reddit tier consensual plagiarism.
This is not normal nor is it common. Any researcher or scholar that wants to be taken seriously will absolutely need to cite their fucking sources. Holy shit.
Circling back around to listening skills – spending less time in the library means less time in an environment where you're supposed to sit still and keep your voice down. You don't exercise that skill at home, nor in a loud urban starbucks. And much of the library might have actually done away with that rule as if it were sidewalk etiquette – the library has "quiet floors" now, and the rest is basically that urban starbucks.

Also, fewer people are staying in the dorms unless the school literally forces them too. Dorms arguably teach people to adjust their habits 24/7 for others around them, get used to having very little in life, and learn about living in general. It's a preparation for adult life, but one with actually less privacy than you may have in your parents' slab home where walking too quickly isn't obviously stomping.
This is so retarded I'm not even going to address it outside of saying that spending a few years at college or university in the dorms is going to very obviously be far, far, far less impactful on someone's behavior than, you know, their entire fucking formative childhood and adolescent years.
 
in my opinion, sound like someone bitching about navigators in the Navy no longer being taught how to course correct with an astrolabe.
They'd probably use a sextant of some sort instead, but I know some US military members received training on navigation with no electronics even quite recently.
I'm sure "skimming the material and pretending to be an expert" is something that is completely novel to modern society and has never been done before now.
Yes, but it's still bad. I would generally define an expert in an established field as someone who has thoroughly gone through the literature, remembers where most of it is, and remembers enough of the actual material to practically get by. They also need to be able to apply their knowledge to real life, but a lot of paper-writing "experts" clearly can't.

Writing a paper using Chat GPT won't really help with that, even if you spot check the sources and fact check the entire paper.

I don't believe most people who claim to be experts, so maybe I have unrealistic standards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shlomo XL
There is an argument to be made about making sure people in a country are all brought up speaking the same dialect, and are all getting a proper educational foundation to build on, but advocating for rigid rules to any language is antithetical to the point of a language at all.
It's also not necessary, certain dialects become more prestigious than others and they become the standard. If you sound like a hick or a thug from the ghetto you'll be discriminated against because people will assume you're uneducated and/or dumb.
 
They'd probably use a sextant of some sort instead, but I know some US military members received training on navigation with no electronics even quite recently.
The inclusion of astrolabe was intentional. Yes I would agree that military personnel being trained to use fail-proof or fail-last tools is important, but I included the astrolabe specifically because of how antiquated it is.

To answer your curiosity though, yes, since 2015 the US Naval Academy reinstated the requirement that all cadets learn fail-proof and fail-last methods of navigation, including celestial navigation with a sextant, the use of LORAN, and the use of basic magnetic and gyro compasses. The whole story behind that change is actually pretty interesting, and part of the reason was the demand from younger cadets that they be taught these things in the event of a near-peer conflict where GPS was destroyed, jammed, or otherwise degraded.
Yes, but it's still bad. I would generally define an expert in an established field as someone who has thoroughly gone through the literature, remembers where most of it is, and remembers enough of the actual material to practically get by. They also need to be able to apply their knowledge to real life, but a lot of paper-writing "experts" clearly can't.

Writing a paper using Chat GPT won't really help with that, even if you spot check the sources and fact check the entire paper.

I don't believe most people who claim to be experts, so maybe I have unrealistic standards.
Yeah I generally agree with this sentiment. I'm wholesale against AI generated articles or essays, even if the material is accurate, full stop.

That being said, the point of that statement was not that the bar for expert should be lowered, or that deep knowledge on a subject shouldn't be required to be classified as a subject matter expert. Apologies if that's how it came across. The point I was trying to make is that bullshit artists have always existed and always will, and while they have many more tools today to bullshit people, those that are willing to confront them have an equally large arsenal of modern tools. Moreover, the crux of my argument is that, while the goal of deep, comprehensive knowledge of a subject should remain the goal, it is not inherently more virtuous or valuable to obtain that knowledge by visiting libraries and reading random books on the subject as opposed to using modern research tools.

If Dr. A and Dr. B have an identical knowledge base, but it took Dr. A 20 years of physically traveling to various archives and libraries to obtain this knowledge, whereas Dr. B was able to obtain this knowledge on 8 years using modern methods, this does not mean Dr. A is inherently more virtuous, or Dr. B's knowledge is inherently less valuable.

Now there is an argument to be made about requiring students to learn different research methods. For instance, several projects I worked on required research that did require me to go to a particular archive and review microfilm, which sucks ass. That being said, being required to learn those fail-last methods, while I agree is important, is not the same as valuing the use of those fail-last methods above modern methods for arbitrary reasons.

To go back to our ship navigation analogy, while I do think it is valuable and should be required that all Navy officers and ship captains learn how to use a sextant, compasses, and LORAN, I think it would be incredibly stupid to arbitrarily demand they exclusively use those methods when GPS is available purely because using non-GPS methods is more virtuous.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Hellwalker and Vecr
I think those who want to learn will learn, and those that don't want to learn won't.

Before genAI you could just pay a nerd to write your paper. Cursive became obsolete while I was a student, but I use it to sign my name.

I worry about what could've happened if a tablet was shoved in my face. Would I still be a nerd? Or would I have gotten addicted to elsagate trash?
 
AI, Tech and other memes are just the icing on the cake. Colleges becoming a meme was writen on the walls way before any ChatGPT or Grok came into the picture.

1st reason: Why academia/"school" is outdated.

The original concept of academia/"school" was that instead of every company and state organization teaching the employees from scratch, everyone gets to pick an entry level of "how far you got the basics". Some fields requires almost none, that's elementary school, think about a cleaner/janitor or a fast food worker. Then tech came and now everyone needs a little more math/writing skills to deal with their jobs, about an high school level (which is the minimum in the West). Then you got engineers and nurses which is bachelor degree (which is the minimum in Asia). or even a master degree.

Well... what went wrong?

It goes back to the original idea being not relevant: Most shit is automated until you get into PhD level / R&D jobs, anything below that you are just doing dummy/busy work. Unfortunately, if you really want to do research and know what you are doing, you need to put the effort into learning, which is hard to do when 99% of the population around won't do it. You don't need to count, read a map or know what to eat... there is an app for it!

It's hard to make an institution about "thinking and learning" when 99.99% of the population don't have to do it for their future job.

2nd reason: Why academia/"school" is crashing in quality.

Well, first is demographics... it's no surprise that having niggers with Europans and Asians ruins the classes in high school and below messes with the class dynamic in destructive way, even the niggerfication of universities is starting to degrade the educational quality at higher levels now. Everything from nigger fatigue due to their presence to teachers actually getting instructed by politicians to lower the standards because the "refugees" need to pass the school (for political PR points a.k.a owning the Chuds on the nigger/arab topic) has fucked over the grading system and the whole point of having a diploma, its supposed meaning is destroyed.

Second reason, it's busy work, goes back to reason number 1, it's mostly busy work to keep people off an already oversaturated job market a few extra years. To no surprise, this has now catched up and you have an accumulated group without a job after high school university/college, this realization has been caught on by most zoomers (due to their older millennial siblings being down in the dirty...). Remember, university today is what high school was 50 years ago: Not mandatory and only for more "complex jobs" later on, most people would either get a job or go a trade school at the age of ~15.

3rd reason: Why academia/"school" is useless.

"Education" = indoctrination. Pretty much self explanatory, you mentioned the "hidden curriculum", which is pretty much teaching kids democracy/(((democracy))) and all the other pozzed shit. Neuroplasticity closes up around the age of 25, so if you can confine people up to that age, you can brainwash people very deep, it's rare to see people being "redpilled" at the age of 30, so from a psyop perspective: Keep people in a confined area to brainwash teach/educate" in an already oversaturated job market (filled with busy work/fake jobs to keep the economy stable) might not be the worst idea in this scenario.

Another level to this is that since most people are not smart enough to actually study above high school level, such as engineering, math and physics etc. To keep the illusion up, you got a bunch of pseudo fields replacing them, also to fill the busy work jobs too.

I made this table to explain what I mean...

Real "science" / has applications that can be usedCorrupted / pozzedFake and useless
Medicine, biology, biochemistryGot pozzed to push sketchy cope substances and to make people infertile on demand claiming it's "what the doctor ordered""Nutrition" science, dietist, personal trainer shit. Anyone can pretty much do this without a diploma.
Physics, math and engineering"environmental/sustainability engineering" ("Energy and Environment" I think is the official English title...) became a term, but it really just is Industrial Engineering and Management with even more politics inserted.
Burgers Engineering?
To be honest "Industrial Engineering and Management" was borderline already more logistics and economy orientated than actual "engineering", I'm ok with that, however,,, "Energy and Environment" is just a climate propaganda university program. Calling it "engineering" is a joke!
These "AI" and machine learning university programs are a meme too, it's literally just computational physics/math, if you want to know ML, learn math anc computer science! I have already seen some sketchy pseudo courses being planned for universities to roll out.
Linguistics and language"le acktually, Scandinavian language are just as complex as the African ones and we need female authors cuz reasons"Journalist - government approved writers to make propaganda. I don't think I need to elaborate more on why this is a useless degree...
HistoriansGovernment approved writers to make propaganda, their job is pretty much to "sort out" what is canon for Western politics and what is "fake" so they can continue to insert niggers into your history books and say it's "science and true".Anything "art". You don't need a 3 years program to learn photoshop and how to draw doodles. At this point... I consider comic book artists and movie produces on the same level as "historians", they both make shit up for the public, only difference is that one is canon IRL and the other one is "fictional work".
 
Last edited:
College is not worth the rate in return for most majors. You're better off just finding work. I recommend civil jobs because many of those still offer stuff like pensions, and many lower level positions have simple requirements. For the most part, you don't need anything more than a high school diploma. Check with your local Labor Department for jobs.
 
Uni is shit in amerilardia because it costs an arm and a leg but you still have a better chance at a good job with a degree than without when you discount all the retards with woke degrees, dont believe the course/bootcamp niggers talking shit about unis while shilling their shit, most decent jobs still ask for a degree and your odds without one are not great
 
Controversial but for people not going to school past undergraduate and treating it like vocational school rather than academia, it probably is as it shows employers you can finish a degree which is easier said than done for a lot of people these days.
Also, blanket dismissal of higher education is unhelpful because for many positions it's a rigid requirement, if your dream job needs a Master's, you get that degree.
 
Post-secondary school is a grade 16 (or 20, or 24) diploma. One you have to get a mortgage to obtain.
And then you don't get a job anyway because your dumbshit parents think the diploma is magic and they don't have to help you find an employer.
Governments have to concede at some point that any university or college without paid work placement for every graduate is a scam.
 
Remember, university today is what high school was 50 years ago: Not mandatory and only for more "complex jobs" later on, most people would either get a job or go a trade school at the age of ~15.
I took tests for college credits in high school, because even back then, college was so dumbed down that a high schooler could do it. Not to mention that the curriculum is mostly fluff and only ~a year's worth is actually relevant to your degree. God knows how many legitimate Master's and Ph.Ds' are flipping burgers.
 
God knows how many legitimate Master's and Ph.Ds' are flipping burgers.
Have you ever been in South America or India? That's how it is for most of them.

I know it's a meme about "import X get X" and you can meme on the scam diplomas, but..., there are just a lot of graduates and no jobs in those countries, This trend is soon a thing here in the West, well it's already a "thing" but it's a taboo to talk about it so it's not "official" in the political discussion so to speak, I know European people with master degrees who had low skill jobs for ~2 years before getting their real job related to their field/diploma. Normies will look at education and think "smart people is just education = jobs created" , which is how Asia thinks about academia and it's already fucked.

Many countries used to have guidelines for how many student spots universities are allowed to have to avoid diploma inflation, which tanks down the salaries of the more "important" people that needs to be motivated to do their job well, such as medical doctors, lawyers and engineers and so on. I think due to globohomo, incompetency and deliberate sabotage has caused those regulation/guidelines for universities to go haywire, and the consequences will only show later when it's too late (when boomers are dead and the gen Alpha starts graduating universities...). Retards will say "muh competition le good", to that I will just ask: Would you have the same philosophy with cops and politicians?
If you ever wonder why most engineers, doctors and lawyers are so lazy, corrupt or just retarded... it's because the effort vs. payment is better that way.

Allowing normies into academia has been a disaster and people are stuck in the "muh university = prospering society" mindset despite it being the opposite.
 
Last edited:
  • Dumb
Reactions: Kalsarikännit
Back