Why Are University Degrees Worth Less and Less?

Here's a video I think is worth watching.



The first third of the video deals with things that should be familiar to most (or all) people here. However, what comes next is pretty interesting, I think.

This video does not deal with the situation in the USA, but has an international perspective on the problem. The examples in the video refer to Spain and Hong Kong, but I think the suggested solutions at the end of it are the most interesting part. I would be interested to know what you think of it.

 

The video starts with a false premise: that the purpose for attending a university is to give you the professional skills you need in your work. This is simply not true. Many people work in areas not directly related to their studies, but having graduated from university isn't necessarily wasted on them.

Having started with that false premise, I decided not to watch the rest of it.

The whole question of ROI, ROE, etc. has been hashed over many times here. Do it. Don't do it. Whatever.

I will say that in a country lacking a national qualifications framework (like the US lacks), a university degree is one of the few ways one can earn a widely-recognized credential...at whatever level.

 

It's too bad you decided not to watch the rest.

First of all, the Youtube channel this video comes from is the English language version of a channel from Spain, hence the Spanish examples. Where the channel comes from matters because this premise (that the purpose for attending a university is to give you the professional skills you need in your work) is widespread in Europe. Incidentally, I agree with you that this is a false premise, but on this side of the Atlantic my opinion is in the minority.

But that's not really the point because the real reason why I posted this video is the fact that the topic is not so much viewed from the perspective of the individual but rather from a societal perspective. ROI and ROE are addressed indirectly in some places in the video without being explicitly mentioned, but the more interesting parts are those dealing with the social effects of what is called degree-itis (that's diplomaism) in the video.

For example, it is claimed that diplomaism/degree-itis is directly responsible for a rise in high school dropouts. The Hong Kong study mentioned in the video is also very interesting in my opinion. What was examined in it does indeed have to do with ROI, but this aspect is not really considered. It's about something else.

And then there are the suggested solutions at the end of the video. These proposals are actually about how to fight diplomaism. One of the suggestions: Degrees should become more difficult.

Maybe you'll reconsider and watch the video after all.

 

I agree with you, but the existence of a qualifications framework does not automatically mean that the problem of diplomaism is solved. Spain, for example, has a qualifications framework and yet diplomaism is a bigger problem there than in the US.

 

The thing is that our (the US) problem goes beyond a lack of a qualification framework. Our higher education system has also experienced a pretty sizable shift that we don't often talk about; the shift from the liberal arts finishing schools for the wealthy to...well, whatever it is that we have today.

The system worked fine when it priced out everyone but the most successful and the kids who studied at these schools used it as a place to polish up on the gentlemanly things a society man ought know. There you could pick up your smattering of history, philosophy, Latin, Greek, science, math etc and fancy yourself a Renaissance man as you prepared to take over whatever financial empire your father was preparing to usher you into. Outcomes weren't tied to the education. They were tied to your family wealth. And your education was a consequence of that family wealth rather than the other way around.

All the while, smaller and less prestigious schools catering to the families of the working poor cropped up and began offering practical educations for the common folk that would allow them to improve their lot in life slightly. Less concerned with Greek and Latin, these were places where you could become a nurse, a bookkeeper etc. I'm not talking about career schools. I'm talking about places like King's College which set out specifically to give the sons of coal miners an education. Even this school, however, came late to this party, however, as by 1946 you had young men with GI Bill in hand who suddenly could embark on careers that they never would have had accessible to them without government backing.

And now we have these very large, very expensive institutions where it is largely split half and half. A student can walk into an institution and, for a six figure sum, walk out with a bachelors degree. In what? Whatever you want! Get yourself a BFA where, like my former coworker, you can pride yourself on never having taken a real exam and how you made duct tape art for three years straight. Get yourself a BSN and embark on a nursing career. Get that degree in physics and carry on to graduate school. Or walk out with a bachelors in one of the humanities. No matter what you study you walk out with a bachelors degree! Some of them are easy! Some of them are hard! Some of them are downright grueling. In the end, it's all a bachelors degree, though. All of them meet the minimum requirement for law school. You can go into a grad program with any of them. Heck, you can mix and match fields, even! Got a B.A. in Philosophy and want to get into a grad program in accounting? You may have to do some foundational courses but go for it! Have that BFA and want an MBA? Sure! Got an engineering degree but want to get that MFA in Creative Writing? Get your ass in here!

And that's the problem. You can go to a university for a "widely recognized" credential that we have decided needs to fit every situation. The result is that it is fast becoming meaningless. And if we, as a society, decided that we're just sort of extending childhood to 22 and university is the new high school then that would certainly be a thing we could do. But unlike high school it isn't free. And if you're racking up a debt that a normal person cannot ever pay then you're damn right ROI is going to come up in the discussion.

Except that, for many people, it absolutely is true. And the reason it is true is because of degree inflation more than anything else.

You can still, for now, become an RN at a community college and walk out with an associates degree. However, there will come a time in the near future where it will all fully give way to the BSN. We're starting to see MSNs cropping up as entry level credentials for people with other bachelors who want to make a career shift. Nursing, something you used to be able to get licensed in through a community college and without the "universally recognized credential" of a bachelors degree now sits solidly on the academic shelf pushing its holders to ever increasing levels of education.

It's unfortunate. But it is the way it is. For better or worse, our society has decided that the purpose of university is very much to provide you the professional skills you need in your work. And it did it by gobbling up things that had no place in a university until fairly recently. But the damage is done and academia now has to deal with all of those pesky outcome requirements that were expected of more vocationally focused programs.

 

Which is why I said it wasn't true. It is used that way for many people, but many others do not use it that way.

 

College degrees are worth less because of supply and demand. A bachelor's degree used to be a golden ticket to the workforce, but not anymore...soon a Master's degree might require for a job.

 

This is what mintaru was talking about with "diplomaism." First coined in 1971 by David Hapgood, the term refers to the creeping demand over time for more and more (or higher and higher; whatever) credentials to do the same job. And, as I've said, a lot of the reason for this is that there are few other alternatives for people, non-collegiate credentials that can be earned to enter occupations where currently only a college degree will suffice.

I think another strong force here is supply. There was a time when only the elite--academically or financially--had a real shot at a college degree. But now there are so many new pathways--especially for working adults (who can often self-pay or, at least, self-finance). There's a credential war going on out there.

Another force is the internet. Not just for program deliverability, availability, and convenience (the previous paragraph's point). But also for jobs. Back just a couple of decades ago, you searched for a job by looking in your local paper. Thus, if you listed a job there, you got handful of applications from which you would select those to interview. But when you list your job on Indeed, Monster, or even your own company website, you get hundreds. How do you sift through them all? Well, since your job in HR is to find a good--not necessarily the best--fill for the position, you look to cut down that stack quickly. Degrees (and certifications) are really handy for this, especially if you're not too worried about screening out an ideal candidate while leaving you only duds.

The relative ease with which students can borrow very significant funds also drives up supply and, thus, competition amongst job seekers.

So, diplomaism, supply, financing, and evil HR directors all contribute to this phenomenon. I'm sure there are other factors as well.

 

And soon, job ads will look like this:

GENERAL LABORERS WANTED

Master's Degree
Heavy Lifting
Minimum Wage

$1 Hr. premium for PhD
No Professional Doctorates need apply
​

 

Maybe. But only if employers find value in those distinctions.

Right now, we have a reversal of that trend. With the "Great Resignation" and the economy's explosive growth upon emerging from the worst of the pandemic, employers of all sorts are scrambling to find and retain workers.

Today--TODAY--I saw a truck pulled over to the side on the freeway. A crew was doing some landscaping--a contractor, it would seem. On the back of the cart it towed had a signed encouraging people to contact them for jobs. On the sign in very prominent letters it said, "Background Friendly." Draw your own inferences, but I've never seen anything like it.

 

I think it means:

If you spent the last 8 years in college - they'll hire you.
If you spent the last 8 years on Skid Row - they're OK with that, too.

Either way - same pay grade. .

 

There must certainly be at least one other factor.

All of this also applies to the vast majority of European countries. But as you surely know, there are some countries in Europe where there are no tuition fees. Actually, diplomaism in these countries without tuition fees should be at least as big a problem as in the US. However, this is not always the case.

Unfortunately, I have no idea what this additional factor is. My first guess would be the countries' qualification frameworks. Although all EU countries have a qualifications framework, there are differences. The problem is, these differences are quite small.

 

That may be a good thing. I grew up in poverty, was homeless at eight years old, and had never been to school until I was almost 13. I have been working hard all my life. People who spent the last eight years in Skid Row know the hardship, so they would become hard workers.

 

Not everyone I know has a college education and many of them are highly successful and wealthy business owners. Which is phenomenal and I commend them for that.

One thing I always say though, is that my house, vehicles, real estate, money, etc. can be taken away from me for one reason or another…however, my education and my degrees are with me forever. No one can take away my BS, MBA, or soon-to-be MS.

People place so much emphasis on the monetary ROI of a degree and very little on the self-gratification aspect. There is so much more to a degree and an education beyond what you get paid…and if salary is the only thing one thinks about, they might as well brush up on their Biology, Chemistry, Physics, and Psychology and start studying for that MCAT because Physicians are about one of the very few who are guaranteed six figures upon finding a job. My brother is 29 years old as an ER Physician making a solid $600,000 per year. Yes, that is his contract. Yes, I read it.

 

Sometimes I wonder if there is any correlation between crimes and the level of a college education. For example, people with four-year college degrees are less likely to commit crimes than people with only high school diplomas. Maybe Dr. @chrisjm18 could give some insight about his specialty.

 

Indeed. This would apply to many of today's numerous homeless - squeezed out by a sudden job loss or incredibly rising cost of rent. Back not too long ago, many people would view a city's "skid row" as an area populated mostly by alcoholics, drug addicts - those with their lives on the rocks. Many would say that these people's sufferings and privation were strictly due to their own fault. Skid Row people (including homeless. mentally afflicted etc.) were (and still are, in large measure) ostracized by people who view alcoholism, drug addiction not as sicknesses - but due strictly to personal failings. Many tend to apply this view to poverty itself. It has to be the impoverished person's fault. THEY must have messed up.

I feel this view is still quite pervasive. People see homeless, extremely poor people and pull away, congratulating themselves on holding onto their own lives. And marginalized people face huge barriers in the job market. What Rich saw may be a good sign for some of them. I hope so.

 

As far as I know it is possible for a school to revoke an academic degree. Of course, that only happens in very, very exceptional cases, and I'm absolutely sure that will never apply to you, but actually your education is the only thing that really can't be taken away from you.

 

If I had to guess, I'd say it has to do with the fact that people without a college degree are more likely to have lower-paying jobs. Statistically, a poorer economic situation also leads to higher crime rates.

 

Personally, I think it is a reference to criminal history.

 

I avoided "the last 8 years in jail" on purpose. But people will think it anyway, I guess.