Hacker News Reader

Comment by Mathnerd314 | Hacker News Reader

Right, most people are there for the parties and get degrees in underwater basket weaving. But the hard sciences and engineering are usually for the credentials.

This is also how the programs are designed - if you fail the course there's no hand holding, you have to do it again or give up the degree. And the support that large universities give for their introductory courses is minimal, so generally your resources consist of the textbook and your lecture notes. The lectures online are just as good if you actually want to learn the material.

View on HN

Off topic, but where did the "underwater basketweaving" meme (in the traditional sense) come from? My dad used to say that all the time in reference to what he considered frivolous academic pursuits.

Looks like the 50's, originally coming from an Alaskan practice: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_basket_weaving#Poss...

When you weave baskets you have to keep the reeds wet. It’s the hardest part other than the design itself I guess. Doing it under water would be easy. (From personal experience, no idea if this is actually correct)

The term came about in the 50s and is mainly used to highlight problems with the exploitative nature of the NCAA. Basically, athletes aren't being told to, or put in environment where they can, balance education and sports. Sports and selling the colleges brand take priority and colleges were known to make it easier for athletes to get through or with passing grades. Sometimes making up entire coursework for their athletes to take. https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/10/16/breaking-ncaa... That obviously undermines and frustrates anyone who had a hard time in college.

My dad, who was a college athlete, used that term a lot to express frustration at systems which no longer served their purpose and were acting performatively.

Thank you!

> Right, most people are there for the parties and get degrees in underwater basket weaving. But the hard sciences and engineering are usually for the credentials.

Did you intend to include a "not" as in "not for the credentials"? I would think you do a tough EE or Physics (or Classics) because you want to learn the stuff.

That seemed to be the case when I was at MIT, though that was a generation ago. Everybody seemed into their work, despite claiming to be upset by the course load. Complaining about it (IHTFP) seemed to be more of a ritual or social activity rather than earnest protest.

No, I meant "for". If you just want to learn the material, you can learn it about as effectively for free with self-study and online MOOCs. It's the credentials that cost money, and the economic assumption is that the credentials are why people attend universities. Did you go to MIT because you wanted a high course load or because you wanted a prestigious degree?

Thanks for your answer — I really thought it likely a typo.

Seems like a colossal waste of time and resources to pay for a school and not enjoy it much less learn anything. A modern bonfire of the vanities.

I still learn a lot by reading, but many things do require interaction and guidance.

> Did you go to MIT because you wanted a high course load or because you wanted a prestigious degree?

I lost my diploma within a couple of hours of receiving it and nobody has ever asked me for it. I went there to learn things I thought I wouldn’t be able to learn anywhere else. At the time (early 80s) my high school classmates didn’t even consider it a prestigious school — those were the ivy leagues.

I mean, nobody has ever asked for my paper diploma either (I lost it as well, the day after it was given) and I've never heard of anyone asking, but that doesn't mean the degree is useless. I certainly have "BA from such-and-such, MSc from such-and-such" on my resume. Evidence, if anyone cared, is only a phonecall away.

There's probably a pretty big correlation between expense and how interested you are in actually learning. A super-famous super-expensive MIT is obviously going to have a different student population than a cheaper and less prestigious institution.

Most of the less prestigious 4 year institutions aren't functionally cheaper than MIT though, i.e. once you account for financial aid. The average tuition paid at MIT (and other "elite" schools) is lower than it is at the majority of private schools and even out of state public schools.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com