Peter Thiel has replaced one flawed institution with another. College works mostly because it gives you prestige and connections. Thiel's fellowships work on the same level. If you want to skip college and start a business, then do it.
That could be all the goal is (though this is speculation). Thiel has said on a few occasions that one thing he particularly dislikes about universities is their politics: he perceives them as an obstacle to libertarianism, since in his view they promote left-wing politics. If he can replace a university with something similar, but with different politics, that could achieve his aims, if his aims are in large part political.
Institution? I don't think you can really call a small handful of unique individuals winning a contest an 'institution'.
I personally agree with the political statement being made, but regardless of our opinions on the political motivations, I think you would be hard press to find someone that thinks this is a suggestion we should stop sending kids to college and instead throw money at them and tell them to help the world.
A small handful of unique individuals winning a contest and then improving themselves using a support structure is universities. It is just a less structured institution. Although, I don't know much about Thiels Fellowship.
I'm not sure I can even have a discussion with someone who legitimately thinks a nationally recognized organization, funded directly by the public, with federal loans being used by millions to take part in a publicly funded organization, can somehow be compared in terms of organized structure to a guy who gives some 40 kids a bunch of money and tells them to go do something with it.
You may be on to something. I just stopped by a few high schools and all of the counselors were talking to me about how they develop their curriculum around trying to get their students ready for theil's fellowship institution.
What interests me is that he has managed to openly ask students to drop out of mainstream education without much public outrage. Is it a sign that the society at large has perhaps stopped associating failure with dropping out?
Or is it because the people who joined the fellowship were too different to be called "normal" already?
And can go back if they wish. I'm not sure how many students eschewed college entirely (high-schoolers or true dropouts), but even then you'd be in a fantastic position to apply if you'd done the fellowship first.
There are also alternative paths for people with good connections from their background. I remember seeing brochure in one of the business hotel I went for work.
It was about a University type establishment but with no major or minor or hard science, instead a mix of business and philosophy curriculum. Because, I paraphrase them, it was more important for the future leader of the world to be attuned to the world and understand the real things in life such as philosophy. They were also conveniently located in a south american country and looked more like a resort than a place of study.
If you follow that kind of route without the proper connection in your family, you chances are basically nil. Those are the place you would send your kid before kick starting him/her at "the bottom of the ladder", i.e. some upper management position with 6 figures starting salary, working on "ideas" and strategy.
Basically, some people are born successful. They can afford to make different choices.
I do think its interesting - his dropout club is filled with individuals that dropped out of already elite and prestigious institutions. Many of them have already signaled their intention to return to school after two or three years.
Myself being a college dropout (though not from some prestigious university), this all sounds a bit foolish to me:
> Before the crowd of technology enthusiasts, he sketched out his plan: grants of up to $100,000 each for up to 20 people under the age of 20 to "stop out of school" and pursue their passion.
Maybe I'm just being sore and jealous, but my decision to drop out was not for the prospects of pursuing my passions. Rather, it was based purely upon economic and temporal constraints: in order to go to school, I needed a ton of money; in order to get money I needed to work full-time; in order to work full-time, I needed to take less and less classes. The fact that I later ended up pursuing my passions was basically out of necessity, not because some investor said he'd been thinking about it for a year and thought it might be better to leave, and oh by the way here's $100K.
Maybe others are not as smart and enlightened as you and foolishly spending money their family could ill-afford on full-time classes that would grant them a career that can barely pay off the costs involved in their education - and Peter Thiel announcement of $100k reward for dropping out could be a wake up call.
Ironically, the vast majority of Thiel fellows were studying subjects which put them on a straightforward track for getting a lucrative career (thus easily justifying the costs involved).
The Thiel Fellowship would be simultaneously much more interesting and controversial if it targeted students at second rate private universities where the value proposition of studying is much murkier.
It's definitely controversial if seen from an American perspective.
But it's much less controversial if seen from a German perspective. So perhaps you need to understand Thiel's German background first. Germany offers many successful alternatives to university.
Now combine it with Thiel's libertarian views: Apparently, Thiel tries to set up alternatives to college privately.
===
EDIT (for clarification):
I'm not saying that Germans would like this particular experiment. But they usually agree that university is just one out of multiple desirable options to gain a qualification.
In other words, I'm saying that thinking about alternatives to university is very German. This leads me to the idea that the motivation for this experiment may have its roots in Thiel's past.
Nonsense. Germans would be horrified by such risk taking. Those apprenticeships you mention have relatively risk free and straightforward career paths.
Reminds me of Shopify's Tobias Lutke– also German, also took an off-beaten path. I transcribed a Keynote that tobi once did.[1] Let me dig up the relevant bit:
> Within my little world, within this school, the most obvious/profound thought I had was that I needed Air Jordan sneakers to be part of the popular kids.
> That seems really silly from the perspective of adults. I was lucky- I got out of school (you can leave school after 10th grade in Germany- you can choose to do an apprenticeship with a company for a couple of years and then join University- really good system.)
> Middle of the 90s, Germany realises computers are getting more important, and we have no clue how to educate computer programmers. Science faculties of universities? Or address in a more traditional, hands-on craftsman kinda route? Lucky- one of the first class of kids to join this kind of thing, then I joined Siemens, and met a really great mentor there.
"I dropped out of school when I was 16 years old. School was not for me. To me, computers were so much more interesting. Right or wrong, I felt like I wasted my time there and my real education was starting when I came home. I lost respect for the institution and of course this meant that I no longer bothered to put any effort into it. They diagnosed me with all sorts of learning disabilities and started to medicate me. I wanted to leave it all behind."
"I decided the best thing to do was to drop out and start an apprenticeship as a Fachinformatiker - computer programmer. This might sound like a stupid decision to people in North America, who often go to College or University to get a degree in something like computer science, but in Germany leaving high-school for an apprenticeship is not out of the ordinary. It is called the dual education system, and it is likely one of the main reasons for Germany’s success."
The thing that kills me about Thiel's critics is how much they ignore the risk that going to college poses.
obviously it can be done at alot of different price points, but Vivek Wadhwa teaches at Duke and Stanford, what sort of career outcome ROI do you need to justify attending those school if you're not attending at a heavily discounted price?
what percentage of grads does Mr Wadwa suppose achieves those career outcomes? especially if they're not a STEM major?
espcially considering that that debt typically isn't dischargeable?
depending on what sort of debt burden you're looking at, taking that on to attend college seems far riskier, if nothing else, you've locked yourself into a game of high paying/ high stress career or bust,
which seems silly to lock yourself into at 18, or at least, highly risky
This is something I find quite odd about US tuition.
In the UK tuition fees are rather high now (though not quite US levels). But they are repaid, at a 'marginal tax rate', only if your income is above a certain level (17K or 21K at present. For comparison minimum wage full time is roughly 13.5K.
So if you take on tuition debt, and then never secure highly paid work, nothing happens. If you decide to live in your car, you can, the debt gets discharged.
From what I know about the US system it seems as if repayments just continue no matter what. Am I missing something? It seems like serfdom baked in to the education system.
My initial worry about dropping out is what you don't learn - things that are abstract but perhaps very valuable. Things like real analysis, literature, classics. That's just a worry, though. I was encouraged to see that this was addressed in this article. I've been accused of not valuing the arts when I asked (on a different forum) if it's really worth spending 4 years and running up tens of thousands of dollars in debt (perhaps more) to study it. Hey, you can do that for songwriting too. Trust me, I love songwriting, but I think it would be beyond nuts to go 120K in debt to major in it. The existing system is broken to the point where we need a new way.
I'm not sure what to make of Wadhwa's criticisms. "Right now we should have had a dozen billion-dollar companies, if what Peter Thiel said was true," he says. Instead, he sees small businesses selling small products, and teenagers teaming up with seasoned executives because they lack the management skills they could have learned in college."
I'm not sure of the numbers - is this in reference to the 24 people who were funded? Falling short of a half dozen billion dollar companies in a short period of time means what Thiel said "isn't true"? Well honestly, I'm not a huge fan of Wadhwa, mainly because I find he does things like calling others (like Thiel) "disingenuous and dishonest" when he should really just say he disagrees and explain why. Even so, this seems strange enough that I'm figuring there is some context I'm missing.
The bit about management is weird, too. It's a bad thing young people are teaming up with with seasoned executives to learn the management skills they would have learned in college? Huh. I suppose there are good extracurricular opportunities in college (clubs, newspaper, and so forth), but working with a seasoned executive seems like a pretty great opportunity to me.
34 comments
[ 2.5 ms ] story [ 67.5 ms ] threadThis is one of those times when I wish it were possible to run controlled experiments in the social sciences.
I personally agree with the political statement being made, but regardless of our opinions on the political motivations, I think you would be hard press to find someone that thinks this is a suggestion we should stop sending kids to college and instead throw money at them and tell them to help the world.
Or is it because the people who joined the fellowship were too different to be called "normal" already?
Nobody worries that somebody who dropped out of Harvard is a "failure." Especially if they get $100k out of the deal.
It was about a University type establishment but with no major or minor or hard science, instead a mix of business and philosophy curriculum. Because, I paraphrase them, it was more important for the future leader of the world to be attuned to the world and understand the real things in life such as philosophy. They were also conveniently located in a south american country and looked more like a resort than a place of study.
If you follow that kind of route without the proper connection in your family, you chances are basically nil. Those are the place you would send your kid before kick starting him/her at "the bottom of the ladder", i.e. some upper management position with 6 figures starting salary, working on "ideas" and strategy.
Basically, some people are born successful. They can afford to make different choices.
> Before the crowd of technology enthusiasts, he sketched out his plan: grants of up to $100,000 each for up to 20 people under the age of 20 to "stop out of school" and pursue their passion.
Maybe I'm just being sore and jealous, but my decision to drop out was not for the prospects of pursuing my passions. Rather, it was based purely upon economic and temporal constraints: in order to go to school, I needed a ton of money; in order to get money I needed to work full-time; in order to work full-time, I needed to take less and less classes. The fact that I later ended up pursuing my passions was basically out of necessity, not because some investor said he'd been thinking about it for a year and thought it might be better to leave, and oh by the way here's $100K.
The Thiel Fellowship would be simultaneously much more interesting and controversial if it targeted students at second rate private universities where the value proposition of studying is much murkier.
But it's much less controversial if seen from a German perspective. So perhaps you need to understand Thiel's German background first. Germany offers many successful alternatives to university.
Now combine it with Thiel's libertarian views: Apparently, Thiel tries to set up alternatives to college privately.
===
EDIT (for clarification):
I'm not saying that Germans would like this particular experiment. But they usually agree that university is just one out of multiple desirable options to gain a qualification.
In other words, I'm saying that thinking about alternatives to university is very German. This leads me to the idea that the motivation for this experiment may have its roots in Thiel's past.
Saying this as a German.
> Within my little world, within this school, the most obvious/profound thought I had was that I needed Air Jordan sneakers to be part of the popular kids.
> That seems really silly from the perspective of adults. I was lucky- I got out of school (you can leave school after 10th grade in Germany- you can choose to do an apprenticeship with a company for a couple of years and then join University- really good system.)
> Middle of the 90s, Germany realises computers are getting more important, and we have no clue how to educate computer programmers. Science faculties of universities? Or address in a more traditional, hands-on craftsman kinda route? Lucky- one of the first class of kids to join this kind of thing, then I joined Siemens, and met a really great mentor there.
[1] http://www.visakanv.com/marketing/tobi
UPDATE: I remembered something else [2]:
"I dropped out of school when I was 16 years old. School was not for me. To me, computers were so much more interesting. Right or wrong, I felt like I wasted my time there and my real education was starting when I came home. I lost respect for the institution and of course this meant that I no longer bothered to put any effort into it. They diagnosed me with all sorts of learning disabilities and started to medicate me. I wanted to leave it all behind."
"I decided the best thing to do was to drop out and start an apprenticeship as a Fachinformatiker - computer programmer. This might sound like a stupid decision to people in North America, who often go to College or University to get a degree in something like computer science, but in Germany leaving high-school for an apprenticeship is not out of the ordinary. It is called the dual education system, and it is likely one of the main reasons for Germany’s success."
[2] http://tobi.lutke.com/blogs/news/11280301-the-apprentice-pro...
Added as a read, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9020335 great post.
obviously it can be done at alot of different price points, but Vivek Wadhwa teaches at Duke and Stanford, what sort of career outcome ROI do you need to justify attending those school if you're not attending at a heavily discounted price?
what percentage of grads does Mr Wadwa suppose achieves those career outcomes? especially if they're not a STEM major?
espcially considering that that debt typically isn't dischargeable?
depending on what sort of debt burden you're looking at, taking that on to attend college seems far riskier, if nothing else, you've locked yourself into a game of high paying/ high stress career or bust,
which seems silly to lock yourself into at 18, or at least, highly risky
In the UK tuition fees are rather high now (though not quite US levels). But they are repaid, at a 'marginal tax rate', only if your income is above a certain level (17K or 21K at present. For comparison minimum wage full time is roughly 13.5K.
So if you take on tuition debt, and then never secure highly paid work, nothing happens. If you decide to live in your car, you can, the debt gets discharged.
From what I know about the US system it seems as if repayments just continue no matter what. Am I missing something? It seems like serfdom baked in to the education system.
but student loan repayment will be a serious drag on any attempt to build wealth for most people who take out loans
I'm of the opinion that most people don't have a good grasp on what the marginal difference in outcome needs to be to justify taking on student debt
I'm not sure what to make of Wadhwa's criticisms. "Right now we should have had a dozen billion-dollar companies, if what Peter Thiel said was true," he says. Instead, he sees small businesses selling small products, and teenagers teaming up with seasoned executives because they lack the management skills they could have learned in college."
I'm not sure of the numbers - is this in reference to the 24 people who were funded? Falling short of a half dozen billion dollar companies in a short period of time means what Thiel said "isn't true"? Well honestly, I'm not a huge fan of Wadhwa, mainly because I find he does things like calling others (like Thiel) "disingenuous and dishonest" when he should really just say he disagrees and explain why. Even so, this seems strange enough that I'm figuring there is some context I'm missing.
The bit about management is weird, too. It's a bad thing young people are teaming up with with seasoned executives to learn the management skills they would have learned in college? Huh. I suppose there are good extracurricular opportunities in college (clubs, newspaper, and so forth), but working with a seasoned executive seems like a pretty great opportunity to me.