ping
Depends on the purpose of “college”. A LOT of parents want k-12 to be babysitting. Doesn’t matter if the kids learn, pass tests, etc. They just have to “level up” every year. Seems that for many of the parents, “college” is just the next 4+ years but with 24/7 baby-sitting. There is a market for 24/7 baby-sitting with the label “college”. And if they can brag about the “name” their kids go to even better.
When there’s a market, there is an entrepreneur who will fill it. Previously-educational-institutions can make more profit by providing baby-sitting rather than education. And entrepreneurs have figured out how to take advantage of that. So they are happy.
Billionaires (and states) are pushing for guaranteed basic income so people who have been in baby-sitting services for the last 20+ years can at least survive. If this catches on, there will be no need for “colleges” to pump out “qualified employees”. Everyone’s “qualified” to collect guaranteed basic income. They’ll live in poverty, but they’ll vote D.
My bet is that previously-ridiculed-institutions can become education-institutions of the future. DeVry, Phoenix, and others will pump out people who can do more than collect a “guaranteed basic income”. It’s a broad generalization and will take many steps/decades. But the “education/skills” vs “baby-sitting” battle is going on and won’t be settled any time soon - to the detriment of many students who want education/skills but are stuck in an institution that has chosen baby-sitting as their primary product.
The “machines will take our jobs” argument is bogus for now. Entrepreneurs will find a way to make money using resources available - even if the resource is humans. And they will pay the resources (more than guaranteed basic income can). “colleges” are not focused on on putting out talent that entrepreneurs can find a use for right now. Many parents and kids understand that. “colleges” will understand, or “educational/vocational institutions” of the future will not be today’s “colleges”