<p>While browsing Indeed.com, I’m seeing so many jobs (especially clerical or entry-level) that request college degrees.</p>
<p>I don’t understand this because I believe that someone with a high school diploma could probably do those jobs successfully.</p>
<p>Is this sort of thing contributing to our current education bubble?</p>
<p>I have always thought that a college degree shows that a person can stick to and finish something difficult. Honestly, my opinion is that it is one reason employers want to see it. Also, in this job market they can request it because they are still getting a lot of applications for every job. And who really does a “clerical” job any more? Even the most clerical job requires some computer skills, and everyone wants employees who can think through a new problem or issue and come to an appropriate conclusion. Looking for college grads ups the chances of this.</p>
<p>yes… the education bubble will burst eventually, but basically they ask for a college degree because they can. They are getting someone that is overqualified for the same price.</p>
<p>Probably because the value of a high school diploma as an indicator of the person’s ability to learn something on the job is not all that great in the US, while the greater availability of people with bachelor’s degrees means that employers can set that as the minimum qualification and still get lots of applicants.</p>
<p>People write about the “education bubble”, but the demand for college education will remain as long as a high school diploma is seen as having little value in assuring the ability to learn something on the job.</p>
<p>With unemployment at 8%-ish, employers can basically do whatever they want in “non-high-tech” fields.</p>
<p>ucbalumnus,</p>
<p>Interesting point. </p>
<p>Some might advocate raising the standards required for a high school diploma rather than having students accrue high college loan debts.</p>
<p>What do you think about such a proposal?</p>
<p>Higher standards for high school by themselves would leave a lot more dropouts… they would need to be accompanied by improved education throughout the K-12 system, which is a much more difficult task, as it requires effort from many directions, not all of whom are cooperative or have the same ideas.</p>
<p>Because college degrees are so easy to get nowadays, it lowers it’s worth. College degrees are now the new high school degrees. One day, they will be so easy to get, Masters degrees will be the new thing.</p>
<p>In my state, MBA’s are actually lowering in value because so my people are able to get them.</p>
<p>What about administering reading, writing, math, knowledge, computer tests, which measure a prospective employee’s abilities?</p>
<p>And it is for this reason that school name and prestige is not completely irrelevant. Instead of administering reading, math, computer, knowledge tests, I will probably just filter applicants based on experience, then GPA, then university.</p>
<p>Obviously experience speaks for itself. GPA is just a #, but the university can vouch for the strength of the GPA. For this reason, certain school names, will get credibility over schools I’ve never heard of.</p>
<p>Administering tests is too time consuming and costly. You’ll get less applicants and less people will be willing to apply to jobs because of the time constraints. It works for some jobs, like software development, but not for others. Also, how do you measure soft skills, like personality and social skills?</p>
<p>At one job interview I had a couple years ago, at a small law firm (hiring non-JD research associates), anyone with a “qualifying” resume was first given an IQ tests, before any interviews were done. Those who scored highest received interviews. </p>
<p>Lots of research indicates that IQ is a phenomenal predictor of one’s ability to complete a job. Though, regardless of IQ, there’s obviously much uncertainty about one’s interest / passion / motivation in being successful in a job. For the majority of people in the majority of jobs on Earth, their main motivation is “money to pay the bills”. And a very high number of people work hard enough to keep their job and do well, but they’re primarily motivated by “not being fired”, rather than by an interest in the work itself. </p>
<p>Being able to do a job that doesn’t interest you while maintaining that job for a long time / getting promoted is a very valuable life skill. As you get older, companies want to see you in jobs for multiple years, so if you have the ability to succeed in uninteresting jobs, it’ll definitely make you more desirable to future employers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s also lots of studies that shows that IQ tests only test for SPECIFIC LOGICAL ASSOCIATION intelligence, but not useful for an all-encompassing intelligence test. Its usual human arrogance to assume we understand everything about other animals and ourselves, if dumb down by a simple equation or test. Just look at the current food industry… (that might be another rant, however)</p>
<p>Also, IQ tests are also biased for particular lines of tinking, and are biased by the speed of the test-taker (similar to the Wonderlic, but not as severe). </p>
<p>Personally, I have issues with reading fast (think I’m somewhat an undiagnosed Dyslexic) and I sometimes read word that does not exist (usually its a similar sounding word). I also over-analyze questions greatly. Although I never took an IQ test, I can imagine I would do poorly due to my very slow test-taking skills, and doing poorly in multiple-choice tests.</p>
<p>However, I do not consider myself ‘stupid’. I hate to sound like a jerk about it, but I’ve always been considered the ‘more intelligent/insightful’ of my peers. Not to say I’m brilliant, but I’m far from a dummy just because I suck at taking tests.</p>
<p>I think also my bad test-taking skills comes from a poor educational background. I received only a handful of exams in High School, and never really learned how to take tests properly. That might also attribute to my overanalysis of questions in tests…</p>
<p>I went on a large tangent. My point is that there’s a lot of factors that go into intelligence that a simple test cannot determine. Intelligence in itself has debatable meanings. </p>
<p>Like your Research Associate position, many jobs now mandate testing and degress for jobs that do not require them. However, that has little to do with needing a better applicant, but rather finding ways to filter through the hundreds of identical-looking applicants with college degrees…and also shows the lack of real economic improvement since the 2007 collapse…</p>
<p>iameggman,</p>
<p>Find out if your local public library has test-taking resources.</p>
<p>lol, I’m already past that. I don’t think I need to take many multiple-choice exams in any advanced schools again. Even then, I always expect a B on those exams, since I study well, but unsure about 1/8 of the questions. </p>
<p>I do well on exams with essays and written questions, where I get a chance to explain my line of thinking. </p>
<p>My main strength in college is research. I’m always the Google guru in group projects, and very good at reports. Which is the most important aspect of grad school (actually had a Economics professor recommending it to be due to this reason).</p>
<p>All I’m saying is that intelligence tests are bull*****.</p>