OnlineBookClub.org

I've been confused and would love to know what you all think.
If someone like our writer here took an unusual road, and made great success, can that be generalized?
I mean, this can't be standardized. So, what message are we delivering? We can't encourage not going to college, and we can't deny the success of some stories. So what do you think?

I think the author was trying to make a point. College is not the only way. So often in today's world, if you have a blue-collar job, many think you must be poor or worse stupid.

There are many roads to success. Persons may prefer working as a white collar worker, being an entrepreneur, a professional etc. We all are created differently and different things appeal to us.The author was articulating one such road - blue collar job.

I would consider this story as more of an alternative offer. like, if you failed college, don't automatically assume you failed life. Most of these stories are a result of people who couldn't go to college for one reason or another, and not about people who intentionally ditched college because why not

I think there are many roads to success and many forms of it. What is success to you? Is it the fact of owning your own company which becomes your source of wealth like the author, is it having a stable job that you don’t need qualifications for, pays well and allows you to work towards delivering your goals? Some of the jobs listed in the appendix didn’t seem all that high paying to me, so I feel like the intention may be the latter and it’s about what you can do with your own life.

I agree with all the previous responses in this thread. I definitely don't think the book's message was to discourage going to college, but to show that it isn't the only way to have a successful career or life in general.

I think the key to an unusual road is that it can't exactly be replicated and that it is unable to be generalized. We can't generalize things because that just causes bigger issues further down the road.

Hager Salem wrote: ↑21 Nov 2022, 13:32 I've been confused and would love to know what you all think.
If someone like our writer here took an unusual road, and made great success, can that be generalized?
I mean, this can't be standardized. So, what message are we delivering? We can't encourage not going to college, and we can't deny the success of some stories. So what do you think?

I don't think it is controversial. It depends on where you live, how and what success looks like according to society's standards. Also, the generation one comes from, and more factors. I think the author is trying to communicate that there are many paths to success. His was an unusual path in the society he lives in.

I think it depends on how motivated you are - if you want to reach success, but don't necessarily have the extra funds for college, there are freelance jobs to build experience, and there are a lot of free courses online that can also help. These options might not have been there or so easily reachable in the earlier years, which might be why the traditional way, was to go to college to learn. I do believe there are options outside of college.

I guess it can seem risky to not go the collage path, as mentioned some type of studies can be risky too, since the competition there is high.
I think it's encouraging to see there are other options. If you fail collage, if you lose job or hate the job you do. That it's not collage Vs minimum salary.
Also it's encouraging for people that want to do something else than college but feel the society is pushing them that way.

I think our society has tried to generalize the other way, that college is the only route to success. Rusk simply seems to be advocating for choice. He states in the book that some careers require degrees, and NEED degrees. But simply attending college out of duty or a poorly thought out future isn’t the answer. He seems to be saying, “Hey! You CAN follow you passion and be successful, and that doesn’t ALWAYS mean college!”

I think the author was trying to make the point that yes, going to college is great, but if you don't have the resources to follow that path, there are so many more paths that don't necessarily require you going to college. That is the way I view it.

Kelsey Roy wrote: ↑01 Dec 2022, 18:51 I think our society has tried to generalize the other way, that college is the only route to success. Rusk simply seems to be advocating for choice. He states in the book that some careers require degrees, and NEED degrees. But simply attending college out of duty or a poorly thought out future isn’t the answer. He seems to be saying, “Hey! You CAN follow you passion and be successful, and that doesn’t ALWAYS mean college!”

I completely agree with you. The author is only trying to change the narrative of college being the only way to success.
You can also make it without going to college.

Most of us believe we can't achieve our life goals without going to college. So, in order not to be left behind, some of us find our way to college without any clear vision and end up being miserable.
Well, I think Rusk is letting someone like that know that they can actually make it without having to subject themselves to unnecessary torture. As long as they have a clear vision.

There are numerous paths to success. People may favor working as professionals, business owners, white-collar workers, etc. We were all formed differently, and we all find different things appealing.