Posted on 06/14/2010 6:16:41 AM PDT by Cardhu
There's good news and bad news in a new report from the Institute for Higher Education Policy. The good news: an increasing number of low-income young adults are going to college these days. The bad news: many of those low-income students remain in poverty after they graduate.
The report (pdf) found that 47 percent of young adults whose total household income was near or below the federal poverty level were enrolled in an institute of higher education in 2008, a healthy five percent increase from 2000, and another 11 percent had earned a degree. However, about one in ten of those students “failed to immediately transcend the poverty threshold.” In other words, they passed college but college failed them.
The introduction to the report quotes President Obama's State of the Union Address from January: "[I]n the 21st century, the best anti-poverty program around is a world-class education." Apparently, and unfortunately, things don't appear to be that cut-and-dry for many impoverished young adults. Although higher education opportunities are expanding for poor populations, outcomes are not getting any better. Which raises the question: what good is a college education without a positive outcome?
There are a lot of surprising statistics in the report that are begging for explanation. (White low-income students are twice as likely as African Americans and Hispanics to remain poor after graduation? Really?) Future reports in the series, which is being funded by the Gates Foundation, will examine educational aspirations, academic preparation, movement in and between schools, and financial aid and debt burdens among low-income young adults to give all of us a better understanding of what's going on here so we can try and address the problem(s).
Even for young adults not coming from low-income backgrounds, college is expensive and may not be worth it in this economy. If we don't start improving educational outcomes for poor students, college might start to seem like a worthless pursuit for everyone – and I don't think that's a road any of us want the country to go down. Gregory S. Kienzl, director of research and evaluation at IHEP, summed it up best: "If you have a degree, you should no longer be poor."
Why is nobody investigating colleges and universities for price gouging?
How about the kids who get a degree in “French Art”??
It is long past the time when colleges & universities need to publish the number of jobs open each year in various field of study.
I don’t think there are 50 openings a year for “French Art” degrees, but thousands of students spend millions of dollars getting that sheepskin.
Meanwhile, as the high school level, there are very few vocational classes even being taught.
It is a lie to push kids into ‘college’ when many of them are just not college material.
Then they get the idea that they are worth at least $100,000 a year in a starting salary.
I cannot wait until that ‘graduate’ who thinks they are worth $100,000 a year in salary cannot find an auto mechanic or a plumber to repair their property.
upgraded marshmallow coloring
nice.
in my old business we used to call ‘em “Vice President of the Left Side of the Building.”
University of Phoenix PING!
An acquaintance is pursing a degree in, no kidding, “Human Rights”.
This is part of the continued failed attempts of the school monopoly to try to tie school with sucess, which has only a moderate corrolation.
No.
I learned this the hard way years ago. In the ‘real world’, a degree is means almost nothing. The only thing is says to an employer is that you’re able to stay committed to a goal and complete it. Look at any ‘white collar’ job description and the requirement for a degree is just a short single sentence. The rest of the description asks for the real requirements; experience. Combine this with the fact that we have less jobs thanks to the Obamessiah, and you have 400 people applying for every decent job that comes down the pipe. Employers are not going to consider anyone who doesn’t have at least 3-4 years of experience.
My kids have science degrees from front line colleges.
The daughter earned the tuition back in three years.
The son went into the US Army as a 2nd. Lt. Spent four years working for bubba.
Came out of the service, resigned his commission and it took him a very short time to earn back the tuition.
In both cases the tuition after four years was a bit over $100,000.
Neither took anything remotely connected to ‘liberal’ classes. One skirted the loony lib profs by taking photography as the required liberal arts class and the other took several languages which qualified for liberal arts classes.
It’s a foot in the door, nothing else, once you’re in the door, you might as well throw away the degree, you’re on your own.
I’m guessing such a degree isn’t about preventing government oppression but about requiring government to provide for people’s needs.
Interesting, and sometimes amazing.
Now, since I am a M.Sc. myself, I can say something about the university. In Holland, a degree is not a guarantee for a reasonable income. Not even for an income per se.
It is a tangled issue. Numerous academic studies do not lead to expertise that is highly in demand in the outside world; yet these studies are indispensable to the maintenance of our cultural position. The sensible thing to do here is to put a cap on the number of students allowed to get in; the cap should have a sound connection to the demand for professionals in a certain discipline.
In economically uncertain times, there is a tendency for young people to enroll in a college, or university. Although this sounds like a good choice (i.e. increase future job chances), I think reality is, um, more diverse.
I see too many ‘slackers’, pretending to study, but being quite lazy, and always going for the minimally necessary markings. If there’s a real capacity in them, it’s that for partying. It may be a fun life, without any real responsibilities. But in reality, it leads to nowhere.
Now, here’s a personal opinion that may be controversial. I agree with the late and esteemed American philosopher Allan Bloom on this: there should be no ‘money-oriented studies’ in the university. One can obtain all the qualifications of an M.B.A. in a private company; although highly fashionable, financial studies have nothing at all to do with the core duties of a good university: to teach, to study, to debate, to be as mentally creative as one can, without the influence of outside interests, financially or otherwise. For money, there are banks; for studying, there are universities.
I plead for serious forms of quality control and evaluation: better to tell a very mediocre student halfway that he/she will have a hard time to proceed as is being done, and get an occupation with his/her capacities in the chosen field of study, then to let him/her struggle, fall, get up, and struggle on with a tragically hopeless perspective. That would save good money.
Well, just my two cents. Curious how others will chime in.
Some “real” majors (in the sense that they are offered by colleges.
Gender Studies
African-American Studies
Women’s Studies
Hispanic Studies
Native American Studies
Islamic Studies
Middle-Eastern Studies
Fine Arts
Dramatic Arts
Design
Classics and Classical Studies (I like this one, but it’s not marketable)
Humanities
Conflict Resolution/Peace Studies
Yep!
Scum always has floated to the top...
;)
You got it.
There is not much work in the under water basket weaving department, but considerable in underwater welding.
Dammit!
Hard work, mixed with imagination and a willingness to find a way, will keep you out of poverty (most of the time).
Throw DeVry and ITT in with that group.
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.