Data Reveal a Rise in College Degrees Among Americans - New York Times, June 12, 2013

"Today’s premium for college degrees is caused partly by increasing selectiveness among employers about whom they hire and screening based on education even for positions that do not require higher skills. But jobs themselves have changed, too."

A tight job market also explains why employers can be choosey as well.
__

This article doesn't mention DL as one of many possible reasons for the increase in Bachelor's degree recipients in the USA, and the comparatively lower cost of DL programs as a response to the exhorbitant tuition that higher ed charges today.

Dr. Rich Douglas and anyone else, any insights?

Article

 

More degrees, less value.

My wife was just hired for a position and her degree was a determing factor in her employment. The job pays $12.50 an hour and its Data Entry Clerk. In this area, we are lucky to get that. And still we have people pumping out degree after degree where it is simply not needed.

I can honestly say that in my career field, Information Technology, not one of my degrees has been personally beneficial to me in the realm of real job skills acquired from college. My skills came from OJT and military training. But, and this is guessing on my part, perhaps a degree or two made the difference in me getting hired for certain jobs.

Times are a-changin.

 

As the U.S. continues to hobble down the road without a serious National HRD (Human Resource Development) policy and strategy, it remains with employers and workers to distinguish skills and abilities. Thus, college degrees continue to be a large part of the equation. There is simply nothing else.

This phenomenon is exacerbated by the "protean" and "boundaryless" career paths forced upon workers with the destruction of employer-sponsored defined benefit retirement systems. (Thank you, Ronald Reagan.) Employers dump some cash into a 401K and tell employees they're on their own. Employees are driven to look for the best deal at all times and jump ship to obtain it. (No sense in staying loyal to your employer in order to earn a pension that no longer exists. Again, thank you, Ronald Reagan.) There's no incentive to develop employees internally--they'll just leave, taking their skills with them. So employees have to develop their own skills and--and this is the tricky part--do it in ways employers will recognize. Industry certifications are one way, but the most common form of exchange--the one most widely recognized--is the college degree. So employees are forced to get them and employers are forced to choose from among them. You can see where this leads--degree inflation, or what David Hapgood called (in 1971) Diplomaism.

Oh, and the fetish we developed in the 1950's to label anyone who didn't finish high school a "juvenile delinquent" sure didn't help. We force kids who are uneducable (or don't want to be educated) to stay in high school and graduate, then we tell them they won't amount to anything if they don't get a college degree. It's no wonder we have college graduates doing data entry at ten bucks an hour.

Here's what I propose:

-- Basic HS diploma after 10th grade, then three tracks:
--- Two more years of academics for college-bound students, leading to a higher high school diploma (or even an associate's; some schools are doing this)
--- Two years of vocational training, leading to a vocational diploma in a particular trade (or even a vocational associate's)
--- Direct entry into the workplace, including a national service program

-- National qualifications framework with multiple occupational tracks (accounting, IT, food and beverage, tourism, manufacturing, energy, etc.) with multiple levels
--- Levels are made up of higher and higher skill levels (measured)
--- Where possible, lateral tracks could be laid for people to cross over to another occupation
--- Employers would know what people knew and could do based on their qualifications level
--- The Federal government could control it by appointing private bodies to manage each occupational area (for example: PMI for project management, or ASTD for training)
--- Equivalencies could be built to recognize and incorporate skills and knowledge acquired elsewhere (like the military)
--- Emphasis would be placed first on creating those occupational tracks supporting our national interests, like cyber-security or green energy development

To make this go, the government could identify and employ some plucky senior manager currently under-utilized, someone who knows this stuff and has a couple of relevant doctorates (or something like that) to reflect that, along with 30 or so years of experience in this area. Yeah, that would be the ticket....

 

Interesting

Rich,

Interesting especially diplomaism. Great stuff.