Have you ever wondered if everything you learned in college was part of an agenda to make you broke? Perhaps the education biz makes students falsely think they’re happy, sloshing away four or five years at a university. Most students go to college, ultimately, in order to find gainful employment at the end. We can no longer assume that even attending an ivy league is so useful.
Twitter really is a handy tool for finding updates about higher education. One group I follow is the University of Chicago press. This afternoon they tweeted a Forbes’ article called “The Three ‘I’s’ of Higher Ed Reform.” The majority of the article poses a series of simple yet thoughtful questions that people should ask to reform higher education. Here are the three I most enjoyed:
- Do graduates of schools with a strong liberal arts focus do worse in the job market than those going to schools with a strong vocational emphasis (e.g., business, communications, or even engineering?)
- Do students perform better or worse when they are paying a larger share of the bills themselves?
- Is there a trade-off between learning and partying? Students spend more time today on recreational pursuits (roughly, “partying”) than studying; has that contributed to declining learning on campuses?
Number one goes back to the eighth grade when public middle school students had to choose between a Renaissance education or a vocational education for an essay question on a state exam. This option is up to students, but school always encouraged the well-roundedness of young adults. Anything less was inferior and playing on a sports team was always a noble endeavor. One of my friends from Girl Scouts had a brother at UCLA and he complained about having to take science courses even though he took AP equivalents in high school and even though he was a non-science major. He must not have passed the AP exams, but I wonder if the rate of college dropouts would decrease if students only focused on their major courses? The problem with this would be that many students don’t even know what major they are when they enter college. This works in favor of the higher education biz.
Number two reminds me of a high school friend who now attends a public university outside our state. To keep up with her higher fees, sorority dues, and food expenses, she worked her first semester at a fast food chain from 9pm – 2am five days a week. No wonder she wouldn’t tell me her grades? I understand why her dad wants to stop paying her education. Since she’s a hospitality major and learns to fold napkins into elephants in class, what can you expect after four years? Her tuition and boarding alone will cost $100,000 for four years and she’s still going to have to do menial work and pay off her student loan debt.
Number three. Of course partying decreases the priority and value of learning on campus. Several of my college professors have said high school is a big day care, but college can be one too.
Conclusion about the problem with higher education
These three questions are all results of the choices students make prior to attending college and while in college. However, the idea that getting a four-year-degree is a fool-proof mean to stability can be fatal. The point of a traditional liberal arts education is to grow as a well rounded person of intelligent thought and independent reason. But now that an eduction is so easily cashable, having any four-year-degree from any college is no longer a ticket to the middle class.
{ 0 comments }




