Acrofox
All dragon~
That's precisely why I stopped. It was embarrassing.If I wasnt getting military rates I'd be pissed at what I was paying for
That's precisely why I stopped. It was embarrassing.If I wasnt getting military rates I'd be pissed at what I was paying for
I wondered if anyone asked this question after I applied for a check airman spot at my airline.It’s a question that opens up another wormhole of hire-ability. Did you apply to be check airman? Why not? Did you get hired as a check airman? Why not?
There’s also a legit brick and mortar California University of Pennsylvania. It’s a state school with a decent selection of online classes. I’m doing a BA in Jurisprudence (basically a degree for paralegals)because I’ve always found the subjects listed in the course catalog interesting since I started considering a degree a decade ago.Choose wisely!
There are (legit) online degree programs and also some "California University"'s that a lot of pilots get involved with as well.
Some are OK, others you kind of shake your head at.
Mostly, people who can't finish a course of study, I'd guess.Well, I mean, that is exactly what they're saying. They just don't want to come out and say it directly.
Who exactly do you think they're trying to "weed out"?
I find this non-responsive.Mostly, people who can't finish a course of study, I'd guess.
So that’s your excuse? Not a rich white boy, therefore college is unattainable?I find this non-responsive.
Mostly, degree requirements are intended, whether intentionally or not, to skim the upper stratum of class—that is, standard upper or upper-middle-class white guys from a traditional background.
They are literally applying discriminators that grease the rails for the "traditional" applicant, whilst giving the working class the "side-eye." It's been referenced countless times, whether directly or indirectly.
When people talk about "privilege," this is what they talk about. Yes, some disadvantaged people can elevate themselves; yes, some otherwise 'advantaged' people do work hard; and yes, sometimes people fail to start or fail to finish because they possess undesirable character attributes. They are exceptions to the rule that it's an awful lot easier to be the "ideal applicant" when daddy pays.
You have diverged completely from the topic at hand. I’m talking about lightning, you’re ranting about lightning bugs. I got lucky as hell—I happened to be extremely good at something that was extremely in demand, and even growing up poor as heck, I made ~$100k in my first full year of work (1999) at 19. Most of the kids I knew growing up are still in my hometown, or close to it, working dead-end agricultural, construction, or retail jobs and living for the weekend, degree or not. Some are dead.So that’s your excuse? Not a rich white boy, therefore college is unattainable?
My wife isn’t a male, she somehow obtained a degree. Her sisters, the same. One recently earned a masters while raising 4 kids, and pregnant with her 5th. All three grew up in a single income household. Maybe if this was 1956, your “woe is me” argument would hold water. Not today.
Historically that was the point of having a liberal arts degree in the first place. College wasn't so much about education and expanding your mind as it was more an upper class finishing school where you learned about classical literature and philosophy.The point is that as soon as you get beyond the “does the applicant have a degree,” and you nudge into “did the applicant complete a 4-year degree in 4 years at a competitive (read: expensive) brick and mortar school” territory, you are screening primarily for social stratum.