Posted on 06/30/2023 10:39:27 AM PDT by karpov
A majority of Americans don’t think a college degree is worth the cost,” wrote Wall Street Journal reporter Douglas Belkin in late March. That revelation was inspired by the results of a survey of over 1,000 adults by the highly respected research organization NORC (formerly National Opinion Research Center) at the University of Chicago, in conjunction with WSJ.
Worse yet for colleges, the proportion of Americans with unfavorable assessments of an undergraduate degree’s worth has been rising steadily and rather considerably over the past decade and probably longer. A decade ago, an already worrisome 40 percent thought colleges were “not worth the cost because people often graduate without specific job skills and with a large amount of debt to pay off.” Now that proportion has risen to 56 percent.
At one time, public dissatisfaction with college was far stronger among Republicans, rural citizens, and males than among Democrats, urban dwellers, and females. But even here the data are discouraging for universities, with significant upticks in negative reactions from previously supportive groups. To colleges, the most frightening trend should be that younger (near college-age) adults have become markedly less fervent believers in the positive economic advantages of a college degree.
Probably the most significant spokesperson for the higher-education community is Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council of Education, who concedes the new data are “sobering … and in some ways a wake-up call.”
To be sure, the operational impact of this negative attitudinal change no doubt varies considerably across the higher-education landscape. I doubt the administration and faculty at Harvard or Stanford are worrying much, but employees at mid- or lower-reputation schools should be concerned, as should present and prospective students and those marketing the bonds with which universities finance capital improvements and other needs.
(Excerpt) Read more at jamesgmartin.center ...
Of the three parties to financing someones education (student, school, finance) only the school has absolutely no reason to control costs. Put another way, there is no capitalistic pressure, no competitive pressure to deliver a quality product for a reasonable cost. Schools feel they can charge whatever they want because usually the student has no choice if they need to attend a particular school. Schools knows the tuition and fee money comes from an outside source - who cares where from. Which source (student, FedGov, banks), how much does a loan cost, none of that is of any concern to a school.
The most obvious solution is to mandate that the school participate in the financing. Additionally if there are multiple participants in the financing, stipulate that the school will be the last lender to receive re-payment. This will pressure the school to insure that they produce a viable product (a well trained graduate) who will have the ability to discharge the financial obligation to all the lenders involved.
But they will.
Very, very rarely does something turn around and that is a work of God. Otherwise, mankind is always on a self-destructive path.
mostly universities use those endowments to subsidize tuition/provide scholarships.
If you are in a STEM field graduate school is almost always free for instance.
Require that the colleges pay up on any defaulted college finance loans.
They need more skin in the game to make their degrees more valuable again.
Many companies started to just generically require them for many jobs - no matter what the field of study. Just a “bachelor’s degree.” This has more people going to college than really need to, which has degraded both the quality of a college degree (look at the nonsense they are teaching these days) and the former advantage of having one.
On a whole, I hope the entire university system bites the dust.
Even for engineers and scientists. Make them all Apprentice programs. Get rid of tenure
“On a whole, I hope the entire university system bites the dust.
Even for engineers and scientists. Make them all Apprentice programs.”
Don’t throw the baby out with the barn water.
There are high quality unions/trades that require a great amount of training before you become a journeyman.
Linemen for example require a large amount of hours, then they have to go to school and take a lot of classes before they are allowed to become journeyman. It takes years.
There is no reason that engineers can’t do the same. They would just have larger focus on classwork similar to what they do now. The difference would be that it would be a trade school with a focus on work. Get rid of the “those who cannot do, teach”.
“Linemen for example require a large amount of hours, then they have to go to school and take a lot of classes before they are allowed to become journeyman. It takes years.
There is no reason that engineers can’t do the same. They would just have larger focus on classwork similar to what they do now.”
By going to college I got to decide what type of education and high I would go. Not some union boss who plays favorites to suck-ups.
I got much more than just how to do a job. I also met people (professors and other students) that shaped my life.
Wife has chore for me. Later
I haven’t really or seen that in all the unions I’ve dealt with around here. Good unions don’t have that many problems it seems.
FReep on FRiend.
“I haven’t really or seen that in all the unions I’ve dealt with around here. Good unions don’t have that many problems it seems.
FReep on FRiend.”
My former BIL was union. Seniority rules. Screw the nubies.
I in my career I have worked with a lot of craft, many very good at their jobs but heard a lot of “against union rules”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.