I have recently encountered several articles in prominent sources explaining that many have begun to question the value of a college education. While the data continue to show a significant financial advantage – the average college grad will earn 2.3 million more over their lifetime than a high school grad – an increasing number are looking for options.
Here are some key points I gleaned from a recent Wall Street Journal article “Why Americans have lost faith in the value of college.”
- Since 2011, the number of campus-based college students has declined by 3 million. About 60% of those who enroll will graduate by the end of 6 years.
- Parents are also less committed with 50% of parents saying they are less interested in sending their kids to a four-year school right out of high school even if finances were not an issue.
- Two-thirds of high school grads believe they would be fine without a college degree.
- Compared to Europe, the U.S. invests far more heavily in higher education in comparison to vocational institutions and apprenticeship programs.
- The processes by which institutions of higher education adapt react slowly with multiple levels of decision-making. Technology-focuses businesses change very quickly.
- – Courses and majors such as computer science are oversubscribed and students are unable to enroll while fewer students are interested in humanities majors such as history.
- Many students are unprepared for demanding college majors and institutions are unprepared to provide assistance. This said, students report spending half as much time studying and attend class more sporadically than was the case when compared to students in the early 1960s. Still, grades awarded are radically inflated. Students are now 3 times more likely to earn an A.
- Cost of a degree has increased dramatically – 180% between 1980 and 2020. Increases appear due to a combination of state support, administrative bloat, and amenities students expect institutions to provide. The cost per year at a public institution is now estimated to be $36,000. Note: I looked up the present tuition at the state institution where I last worked and it was $10,951. Just to be clear, expenses such as room and board also play a large role in what are regarded as college costs.
The WSJ generated enough attention that other bloggers responded. Bryan Alexander in the Future of Education suggests the WSJ article offers an important perspective, and adds some additional comments. For example, this writer notes regarding University STEM, health, and business enrollments that actual enrollment has soared. Some are concerned that the enrollments are an overreaction and may surpass hiring opportunities. In summarizing recent criticism of higher education, He also notes that frequent criticisms seem focused on vocational skills and the lack of attention afforded such skills in so many majors. Why not get kids into the workplace more quickly?
I have fairly traditional beliefs related to student education partly because my career-long vocation was in higher education. I keep wondering what has changed that would negate society’s commitment to learning beyond high school. Are the work skills critics imagine all that citizens need to prepare them for life? Are most high school graduates prepared to function as citizens, parents, and employees? Do they have the social skills, general knowledge, and basic maturity we want adults to have?
Yes, many 18-year-olds would probably benefit from a gap year traveling or living on their own working a low-income job. Not every learner is prepared to take advantage of higher education. The idea of apprenticeship programs appeals to many. Just what vocations want to support 18-year-olds as apprentices? Is an apprenticeship right out of high school rather than vocational school what employers would prefer?
From personal experience, many beginning college students have limited skills as independent learners. Colleges indeed struggle with how to serve these students, but assuming the students are prepared to take on challenging work is ridiculous. A surprising number are poor readers and writers. It takes more time to develop sophisticated critical thinking, creativity, and social sophistication all of which come with exposure to challenging learning experiences in multiple content areas.
I have another traditional reaction to the vocational orientation argument. The response to this perspective used to refer to data on how many different jobs the average adult had in a lifetime and question whether specific training prepared individuals for this range of work. When is more general preparation suited to a variety of occupations? Programming/coding is a good example. While we are obviously in the age of digital, is the preparation as a coder a golden ticket to a lucrative career? Consider the massive recent layoffs at the big tech firms. Also, recognize that AI now threatens to drastically reduce the number of low-level code monkey jobs.
One other insight is important. Universities are about more than teaching. Those of us who have held these positions typically had contracts that identified responsibilities in the areas of teaching, research, and service. These areas are not as isolated as some might imagine when they advance a stereotype of the pure researcher indifferent to teaching and undergraduate students. First, like any stereotype, there are likely some instances in which the stereotype holds. However, the correlation between research productivity and student instructor ratings is positive and not negative. On average, students evaluate more prolific researchers as slightly better teachers. Research is just a different type of experience and it makes sense that those with actual experience doing something have more to draw on when teaching what they do. Why it is assumed that individuals would be indifferent when describing what they know and do?
If there is what I would consider a legitimate issue, it is that research comes with the time to do research. Hence the 60, 30, 10 contract that is typical of tenure-track faculty members. By the way, the 60% is teaching and the 30% is research. Universities are indeed hiring more adjuncts to do teaching, but here is the irony in what so many critics contend. You can’t both complain about teaching time and also complain about adjuncts who frequently function as full-time teachers.
One final comment regarding the overlap of these areas and the investment in teaching. We spend a great deal of our time doing research with our students. Much of this time is 1:1. Should working directly with students in this capacity be considered research or teaching? Research is very rarely a solitary endeavor and working with students in this way is a form of apprenticeship.
Regarding complaints about publication pressure and the resulting focus of academics. Yes, the pressure is real. So, by the way, is the pressure to generate positive student teaching evaluations. The pressure to publish is related to the pressure to generate grant applications and grant applications bring in a good proportion of the money needed to fund research and the infrastructure of universities. Grant funds are available for most disciplines, but it is far easier to generate big money in some disciplines than others. The cost of research is also very different across disciplines. My point is that money explains a lot when it comes to how faculty members spend their time. The money states and students pay is not sufficient to support the multiple missions of higher education.
What about the research itself? What would happen if universities were downsized to trade teaching time for research time? Who would decide which research efforts were worthwhile? It is certainly the case that corporations and other areas of the economy (e.g., medical institutions) engage in research. However, this research is likely applied rather than basic and is focused on immediate rather than long-term goals. Advances would grind to a halt without being constantly stimulated by advances in basic knowledge. There is also the significant challenge of who trains the researchers. Basic research skills take time and experience to develop and this simply does not happen without universities providing the experience to develop the necessary skills.
Conclusion: I have no idea where all of this is going. Some experimentation will certainly be involved and people have very different ideas about what alternatives should be explored. My intent here was simply to expand how the issue is presented.