I'm not sure of the value of a college education. Especially if we're talking about earning a living. My second career didn't require a college degree and I've made more money than in my first career that had a degree requirement.

Obviously some careers require the extra academic years.

But for every doctor, lawyer or research scientist, you often hear about the Ph.d who drives a truck or who works at a fast food place. Donald Trump once said in his book "The Art of the Deal" that MBA's were okay at number crunching but they were not very creative or imaginative in business. Of course, he's a bit of a hypocrite since he made his children go to the finest colleges.

My oldest son was a musician and struggling graphic artist, who turned his skills into an executive position with a major record company. My second oldest son decided after high school to enter a trade. He's 25 and clears about $130,000 a year working with marble and granite. When he becomes a contractor he'll probably make more.

If a college education was necessary to make a good living then all the pro basketball players would have a Ph.d

The ability to think and solve problems does not require a college degree. But it is no doubt necessary in some fields. Brain surgery comes to mind. If it's about money, I know plumbers who make more than brain surgeons.

Just remember, the difference between an electrician and a plumber is a degree. Oh, and a paycheck.

As was pointed out in the last two paragraphs of Mr. Peterman’s "thought generator" for today, the value of a college education depends upon whether one merely attends college or truly participates in it.

Back in my former life, when evaluating job applicants for non-technical functions, especially those without previous work experience, I considered a college degree as a demonstration that the job candidate has the ability to learn at a theoretical level. Insofar as technical careers, (which in our case was hardware and software development for the telecommunications industry) a successful degree was a sure ticket in do to the shortage of experience at the time.

Eventually though, I believe it’s a combination of knowledge (no matter how that knowledge is acquired) and experience that yields wisdom. The ability to consistently translate wisdom into proper action is a fairy decent barometer of success in any field.

I guess I would say that a college degree is surely not a silver bullet to success, nor is the lack of a degree necessarily a barrier.

Another point here. If the degree is important to the profession one seeks, then get it. But get it somewhere that you can afford. My husband has three graduate degrees, two from a prestigious school for his field. He then taught at two expensive liberal arts colleges. He then went into consulting and really got a wake-up call. Nobody cares which college he went to (maybe Harvard is a bit of an exception), all people care about is if he could do the job. Nobody ever asked what his grade point average was, what he wrote his PhD dissertation on, what publications he had. Simply, could he do the job, do it expediently, do it right?

Even if you go in for some delicate surgery, do you examine your doctor's diplomas on the wall? Do you ask where he took his residency? Or do you just care that he has a good track record performing that particular type of surgery? So why go to some prestigious, expensive school that will leave you with a gazillion dollar debt? Do your first two years at a community college and then transfer to a state school. If you want to learn, you can learn anywhere...even a corn field if you have the right stack of books. Yes, you do have to want to learn, but learning doesn't mean you have to spend way too much to do so. Our son could very well have gone to an expensive, prestigious college, but he found a secondary state school and declared that it was just what he wanted and really flourished there. He is a great success now and nobody even asks where he went to school. Also, the small, expensive, liberal arts colleges simply can't have the library facilities that a large state university can offer so when the students at that small college need to write a major term paper, where do they go for in-depth data? The large university close by. So why pay the big fees when you use the facilities of the place with the lesser fees?

As you can see, you have definitely hit a sensitive soapbox of mine...

I work in a "degree required" field, medicine. A degree does not confer ability upon the recipient, however. This is clearly evidenced by the number of truly awful physicians I have encountered over the years. We all get the same education, have access to the same treatment tools, and yet some of us have patient recovery rates two or three times higher than others. It's not a skill we acquired in the lecture halls of the universities, I can assure you.

college is a 4 year adjustment period between apron strings and boot straps.

My personal observation after having worked in the higher education system for over seven years as an Adminitrative Assistant to the VP of Academic Affairs and Dean of Students, is that having a doctorate or any degree is not necessarily a prerequisite to financial independence. There were many employees without degrees within this particular college system who made more money than those with their doctorate. For instance, the grounds manager made a considerable amount more than most of the tenured professors. The grounds manager did not have any college credits just common sense and experience. I can say that most of the professors who taught there did so for the obvious right reasons and not financial motives. Thank heavens... there wouldn't have been any teachers otherwise. So much for college being a necessity. I, on the other hand prefer my physicians and attorneys to have that little piece of paper framed and proudly displayed.

Mr. Peterman is certainly correct that a short public service stint or at least a mandatory delay of some sort may mature young people and motivate an appreciation for higher education. As for myself, I wasn't mature enough to appreciate a college degree until my early forties. My first attempt at age 18 was a major disaster. When I did finally make it back...I can honestly say it was a very difficult but enjoyable experience but as for the financial gain...not so much. I am one of those people who do their job because they love it.

Like all surveys, you need the details behind the numbers. I have read contrary reports confirming that while starting salaries of college grads are typically higher, over time, actual job experience outweighs this advantage....with the wage gap narrowing dramatically between those with degrees and those without (when compared within the same field of work).

And for highly specialized fields like medicine, there is a trade-off for these high incomes - namely student debt the size of a mortgage that most don't have paid off until their mid 40's (so, how far ahead are they really?)

IS college necessary? As more and more young adults achieve degrees, it is quickly becoming a disadvantage NOT to have one as you first enter the work force....if for no other reason than the "competition" does.

However, success in any field still comes down to good old-fashioned hard work and learning your way up.....and is a large part of reaching that 2.1 million lifetime earning level. We should do a better job of preparing our college students for this reality.

Similar to MACKDADDY1, My first try at college was at 16 (I was part of an experimental group of combining some elementary grades) and I sure was not close to being prepared to do justice to the privilege I was offered of a higher education. It took me almost two decades before I went back to earn my degree. I was already holding a good position that on paper stated that a degree was required, but I went back to tie up what I thought of as a loose end, and also to fulfill a promise made to my parents. I loved, appreciated, and took full advantage of the college experience the second time around.

I too feel there is a lot of merit to Mr. Peterman's thought regarding some type of productive bridge between High School and College.

As far as doctors and lawyers go, I would prefer to see their undefeated records posted on a wall, right next to their diplomas.

Definitely agree with Mr. Peterman. I went to college right after high school and "wound up" with a degree that I have never used. I really didn't even do that well when Jeopardy was on and that topic came up.

I did get a lot out of graduate school in my thirties after I had some work/life experience under my belt and knew what I wanted to study. I woould vote to take off at least a couple of years!

It's true, many times, that one can leave college - in fact, any place of learning - feeling like that certain knowledge isn't applicable in any circumstance one might face in the coming years, and beyond such coming years, one will probably have forgotten it all anyway. Just look in today's math classes and you'll hear echoed moans of "When will we even use this stuff?" But further than the usefulness of the education is the intrinsic value of the education itself, i.e., the knowledge gained. There's no fault in knowing more, regardless of if you're going to use the knowledge or not. There's that old 'knowledge is power' axiom that comes up every so often in our lives; I think that it's universally applicable.

So Sen. Blutarsky was correct? Seven years of college, down the drain?

Here's a modest proposal for everyone's consideration.

At age 16, begin providing an apprenticeship in a trade for those who want it. They can work on projects for the public good. At age 16, give the option to do a 2 year paid community service of some type that would benefit society in some positive way. The options could be numerous. work in a hospital, clean up the environment, etc. Perhaps school would be two days a week and the other three working in a trade or community service.

Also, why don't we let people take a two year break from work at certain points in their lives to pursue advanced education. The two years could be paid for with a combination part-time work and social security. Even for those who didn't want to pursue higher education for those two years, why couldn't they work part-time, collect social security, and enrich themselves. How about two years learning to paint, play a musically instrument, or writing the great American novel. Or two years volunteering with Habitat for Humanity, the Peace Corps or your local church or humanist group doing something you believe in.

I think we would put off collecting social security full time for many years under that proposal. we could have long, productive careers (maybe several careers) and delay full social security till much later in life. Doesn't it make sense to dip into you social security occasionally through out your life for personal enrichment and community service?

Does this make sense or not?

Like taking a sabbatical! Sounds like a plan. Back to my husband,... but he sold his consulting company at age 55 because he had so much else he wanted to do that he didn't have time to do, what with all the work that his company got. He was concerned that he would end up too old and addled to be able to accomplish any of it if he didn't take a stand. Three books and the digitizing of a collection to be given to a (state) university later, and he feels that these are the most productive years of his life. Continuing education is not only important to the individual, but to society as a whole as it would mean that people would continue to contribute a great deal for their whole lives. So, yes, yes!

By the way, the 3 grad. degrees he has is because after the first one, he realized that that field wasn't what he wanted to do when he grew up.. at 28. He found someone who could put him through grad. school, married me, quit his very lucrative job, and off we headed to other parts of the country so he could start over.

It certainly would be a waste to know everything about farming, but that's the thing: one can never know if one will never farm. So I have to agree with you, Mr Peterman: one should pursue knowledge as tenaciously as one possibly can. So I guess it's not a question of diplomas and degrees and formal educations so much as simply learning.