I visited a university recently and brought up IRC in a conversation. Some students did not know what it was and some said “that’s for old people”. So, that’s the genz perception. I wonder to what extent that’s true… what proportion of IRC users on the notable networks are genz.
I have doubts, because it seems there are still snot nose trolls demonstrating that children are still around. But it would be interesting to have some reliable stats.
Lol. If that’s how science works for you, you are following some shit science. Survey results are notoriously the cheapest and shittiest way of gathering information about the world. Anyone saying that their survey results should supercede the opinion of actual experts in a field shouldn’t be taken seriously.
And those same adults would be the ones who said they were going to college for oh-so-noble reasons. Surveys are worth somewhere between jack and fucking shit in science because people can answer differently based on what they had for breakfast this morning. We could easily imagine that the difference exists because modern students are simply more self aware.
It isn’t an emotional plea. I’m pointing out your biases, which are leading you to a myopic and closed minded view of the situation. I am hoping that by pointing out that “kids these days don’t have any work ethic” is such a worn out cliche, existant aince the time of the greek philosophers, that you will take a step back and consider the fact that you are just an old man yelling at clouds.
Are you high? The cost of university is intrinsically linked to students’ economic future. If you are staring down the barrel of tens of thousands in student debt, you will be much more concerned about your economic future for entirely rational reasons.
Anyone saying that a general finding supercedes a specific finding by actual experts in a field shouldn’t be taken seriously. Anyone who proposes disregarding evidence should not be taken seriously, and certainly not more seriously than Dr.Bregman who cites the research in his talks.
If you don’t control for that, you’re doing it wrong.
We could imagine that, only if you actually study the wording of the survey and first find that it was incompetently worded to ask the questions straight, prima facie, so as to leak to the study subjects what is being studied.
The bias is evident in your emotion. You cannot counter the evidence so you look to attack the person. It’s despirate.
To be close minded is to disregard the facts. Such as claiming the evidence should be ignored because a survey was used.
You would do better to actually look at the evidence and find specific flaws, rather than rely on broad hand-waving at every level of analysis.
It’s a worn out strawman. It requires you to misquote me to make an emotional plea.
Plz don’t post when you are drunk. Surely if you were sober you could separate the cost of university from future goals and outlooks. It is in fact extrinsic motivation that is replacing intrinsic motivation.
There is no intrinsic link between the cost of university and the students’economic future. You are conflating cost with attendence. Attendence is intrinsicly linked to the students’economic future. The cost, which may or may not be paid by the student whole or in part, is extrinsic.
That concern requires being money-centric to begin with.