The U.S. College Scam

Colleges and universities go a long way to exacerbating the income inequity in our country. A very long way. And it's only going to get worse. The college degree has become the dividing line between those who get "in" and those who are left out.

It didn't used to be this way. There was a time when getting on to a good company was what you needed to do. They'd train you along the way as you showed potential. Employees would rise--often to great heights--without the benefit of a college degree.

That all began to change with the GI Bill after WWII. Suddenly, millions of GIs were in the education marketplace. Many earned vocational certificates, while many others pursued degrees. The diploma inflation had begun.

By the 1970's, this was already recognized as a real problem. (See David Hapgood's Diplomaism for an amazing example. The same jobs were requiring more and more education (and degrees). But it was about to get worse.

In the early 1980's, the creation of IRA and 401K accounts caused employers to shift away from defined-benefit programs (where they bore the risk) to defined-contributions programs (thus shifting the risk to employees). This had a side effect of making employees more mobile--they could take their retirements with them and were not as bound to their "lifelong employment" companies. But this led to two other conditions.

Employees were more likely to pursue higher qualifications in order to make themselves more marketable to new employers who didn't know these new employees. It also caused employers to be less willing to invest in the development of their employees, worried they would take that training elsewhere.

But where could employees go for these qualifications? There wasn't--and still isn't--a strong qualifications framework where universally recognized vocational certifications would be available, so they went to school. The academic market responded. It's no coincidence that we saw an explosion of degree programs--and entire universities--spring up to meet the demand. Programs offered at night, on weekends, by correspondence, online (later), and by independent study were suddenly everywhere. In 1980, DETC accredited exactly two schools awarding the bachelor's. Uh, that changed, right?

Again, schools weren't ignorant to this shift. They got into the business hard-and-heavy. But here's the kicker: with all those programs popping up, why didn't supply--which met demand--ensure an equilibrium of costs? Why did costs soar, and continue to soar? Because the marketplace is imperfect and the laws of supply and demand are considerably weakened.

Consumers make choices largely divorced from their costs. Not only is higher education a thing purchased now but used later, financial aid (especially loans) means that even though it is purchased in the present, it isn't paid for for a long time. This distortion has allowed schools--for-profit and not-for-profit alike--to drive up their costs like mad. (Even though they're cutting their costs by creating a chattel-level class of faculty.)

All of this has served to do two terrible things. First, it ensures a whole set of society will be locked out of the middle class. (Sorry, but low-skill jobs that pay a good wage are gone--get over it.) Second, those who are able to make the leap--except those coming from the upper classes anyway--are saddled with crippling debt for degrees of dubious value (except for entry into the working middle class).

This country needs a strong qualifications framework that provides vocational pathways outside of college and prepares people to go up vocational ladders to higher and higher levels of prosperity and capability. We need workers prepared to do high-value jobs that will distinguish our country in the world marketplace. Relying upon colleges and universities as the source of this is folly.

I have personal experience in this. I grew up in the lower class of society. I used higher education as a way out and up. I've done two bachelor's, an MBA, a PhD, another thing, and two professional certifications, all while working full-time. I've never had even a minute as a traditional student. That said, it was hard. And the path I took doesn't provide answers for the vast majority of Americans who want to prosper without getting a college degree.

We as a society should encourage it, support it, and foster it. We should make it happen. Not for social justice--although that's a good reason--but because it benefits all of society. High-skills workers are what we need, and now. A strong qualifications framework can provide that, targeted to our society's most important vocational areas. Where's the bold leadership in Washington who will do this?

 

First solution is to get Washington completely out of the picture. Thanks for the commentary!

 

Consider that there are now way too many people with higher education (degrees) without the professional experience to warrant their education. Having a college degree is nothing more than something you can use to tick a box to get your foot in the door so you can showcase your skills. But if your going after a graduate degree without having any experience in your given field, your going to find a difficult road ahead. (No matter the PR department at your college of choice has to say about it)

 

No. Just the opposite. Only government has the resources, capabilities, and will to design what we need. The government isn't the enemy. It is us.

 

Right. Which is why a game-change is necessary. Look to other countries' strong qualifications frameworks for examples.

 

Yes. Mutual recognition is a key. Credentials are proxies. They speak for us in situations where we cannot. But they do that only if recognized. That's why we talk so much about weird-sounding degrees and schools, and we wonder about different forms of institutional recognition. But in a strong qualifications framework, the levels and types of qualifications (which would continue to include university degrees) become the capital exchanged between employee and employer.

I hold two professional certifications--the PMP and the SPHR--largely for recognition.

 

I grew up in New York and the State had a system that allowed High School students to enroll in High School half a day and vocational school the other half. Programs included diplomas in aircraft maintenance, licensed vocational nursing, radiology technician, Baker, etc. Not everyone is wired for academics!

When you say "Washington" you mean the Federal Government. I'll agree government is better equipped to orchestrate it but it should be State government. The State should know the vocational needs for its region. The Federal Government has proven time and time again it is not capable to operate efficiently and within budget!
Actually, when the Feds can't operate within budget they vote to raise the budget and taxes and eat a larger slice of the pie. It's a fire that wants more fuel!

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

- George Washington

 

When you say, "the government isn't the enemy. it is us", I believe you grossly underestimate the American people! We have brilliant Americans that can run circles around anyone in D.C. Untie an American and lookout! You'll have innovation, cost effective solutions and a workforce that will be second to none in the globe!

 

Correction: State Government working in a collaborative environment with "industry" is probably a better solution than strictly State government oversight of vocational programs. With that said, industry needs to go to State Governments and Educational Boards and form a relationship that provides more vocational professions like pilots, mechanics, nurses, plumbers, machinists, etc.

 

College degrees and vocational training aren't mutually exclusive. Most vocations can be found as associates programs. I'd much rather direct someone to an associates program at a public technical college or community college than a for-profit trade school. Almost every trade school in my city is for-profit and charges 5 to 10 times as much as the community colleges for the same types of programs. Yes, I know that CCs are subsidized, but I've seen too many people take out $20k to $50k in loans for vo-tech training in a low-paying field such as medical assisting.

 

Agreed! Many associate degrees are the best bang for the buck!

 

I got an A.A. degree for FREEEEEEEEE in California (they used to be free there). There was no cost to anyone whatsoever, except for the taxpayers, but they don't count. Thank you taxpayers for subsidizing my first degree. After getting a free degree from the California taxpayers, I had to leave that state because the taxes are simply too high.

A relative of mine retired as a school teacher in Los Angeles and her pension provides as much money as she made when she worked full-time (she gets 100% of her fulll-time pay as a government retiree). The California taxpayers are extremely generous. Bless them.

All these government educational subsidies and pensions are freeeeeeeeeee and no one has to bear the short-term or long-term costs, right? Those nasty for-profits should be ashamed for charging so much money. Government educational programs are the only honest programs where no one is getting financially screwed, either now or in the future.

 

You're forgetting that college-educated people usually make a lot more money than someone with just a high school diploma. These are future taxpayers who will be paying back into the system. Currently, more people with college degrees are delaying buying houses because of the amount of student loan debt they have. They also have less discretionary income to help drive the economy.

 

No sir, that was not forgotten.

 

In Georgia, we have a program called the HOPE Grant, which pays for a good portion of the tuition for students enrolled in certificate or diploma programs (A/C repair, car mechanic, welding, EMT, cosmetology, office worker, phlebotomist, CNA, truck driver, etc) at state technical colleges. There is no required high school GPA to qualify, but students have to be making progress in the program in order to continue receiving the grant. It can give a second chance to people who did poorly in high school but are willing to work to have a better life. If a student does well (A-B average), he or she can use those grades to qualify for the HOPE Scholarship, which pays a portion of the tuition for an associates or bachelors degree. Even if they don't go on for a degree, they can move into a better paying and hopefully more fulfilling career.

I think that this is a great program for individuals and for the state. When someone is motivated to pull themselves out of poverty, this program can give them the opportunity to train for a better paying career, and the benefits to the state far out weigh the costs of the program since the cost to earn a certificate or diploma is less than what a poor family would receive just in social service benefits in a year, in addition to the financial benefits of moving someone into a tax-paying bracket. The effects can be generational too since children learn to value education more when they see their parents go to college.

What I would like to see is for every high school student to be required to choose at least a short training course for some type of work once they get out of high school, even if they plan to go straight into college. I worked really hard to graduate very near the top of my class in high school and was shocked to find out that I was qualified for absolutely nothing when I got out into the world of employment. I have worked hard to make sure that each of my children knows some marketable skill before graduating high school so that they never find themselves in the same situation.

I would also like to see better counseling in high schools for how to get into and pay for college or career training. My siblings and I are first generation college graduates, and it was an extremely difficult and long process (with many mistakes along the way) to figure out how the higher educational system worked. I could have really benefited from a little guidance from someone who understood the process, so I try to share what I have learned with other people who want to go to college.

 

Yes. The Federal government. OUR government. The one that keeps planes in the air. The one that built the interstate system, won two world wars, keeps our water clean and our food safe. The one that operates the very laws that protect us as a society. The one that brought civil rights to all, that exists because of the will of the people. The one that held the Union together when some states committed treason and tried to destroy it. The one that has had to step in and ensure freedom when some states insisted on denying it. Yes, with all of its flaws, our government.

The notion that state governments are somehow more effective at governing than is the Federal government is laughable on its face. I would welcome the evidence that proves this point.

 

Yes. As I noted in my post, it is a huge factor that skews the marketplace. Many extra dollars are chasing the product--degrees and an education--than should be. The costs are skyrocketing and the value diminishing.

We saw the same thing a few years ago when sub-prime lending drove up housing costs and blew up the market. Ticking....ticking....