

American Higher Education: Not what it used to be - kartman
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21567373-american-universities-represent-declining-value-money-their-students-not-what-it

======
firefoxman1
I was reading an article in an _OLD_ print magazine published in the year 1900
(probably around when that picture was taken). It spoke of the increase of
college students in the U.S. and made some comments on how past countries had
suffered because of too many college graduates:

 _"There can hardly be too large an attendance at our colleges so long as the
sturdy common sense of American life keeps its balance — the common sense that
forbids even an effort to make a distinct "educated " class which when
"educated" is unwilling to do the common tasks at which young men must first
try their mettle. In Germany there is a surplus of scholars who are worth
nothing to the community. They might have been good craftsmen, but university
training has left them unwilling to do the common work of the world."_

Has the U.S. lost that "sturdy common sense" recently? Too many degrees are
handed out (a large part thanks to for-profits) to those who probably
shouldn't have a degree. If they were to attend a vocational school or become
an apprentice instead of college, college degrees wouldn't be watered down by
those who don't even need them, meanwhile colleges would have a student body
of only those fit to be there.

~~~
impendia
What exactly is this "sturdy common sense"?

I am a mathematics professor, and I have the opportunity to work at what I
love. Why should I forego this to instead do "the common work of the world"?

If the only paying job available to me were digging ditches, then I would do
it happily and well. Presumably the same for most people. But this comment
doesn't seem to describe a choice that anyone actually faces.

~~~
Retric
Recently, a fairly large number of people where unemployed for 6 months to 2
years which where receiving unemployment checks significantly above minimum
wage. There was no point in them being ditch diggers as they would have earned
a negative wage by doing so. Arguably, if most of these people had spent 20
hours a week doing manual labor they would have been far heather and even more
motivated.

Now, there where plenty of reasons to set things up like this, but it also
distorts what people thought was reasonable 100 years ago.

~~~
joonix
Yes, because in the construction boom that followed the Global Financial
Crisis, foreman would love to hire overweight middle aged accountants to dig
their ditches.

------
flexie
\- Only 25 percent of college graduates are deemed proficiently literate. How
did the 75 percent complete college (and how did they get in to college in the
first place) if they can't read and write at a proficient level?

\- 43 percent of all grades are As. Isn't an A supposed to be the best grade?
I was always very impressed when someone was mentioned as "a straight A
student" but I guess it just means she got average or slightly better than
average grades :-)

~~~
Kaivo
I'm currently in a Computer Science University program that I'm doing Online
and it pains me to see so many high grades.

For instance, on one of the C++ homework we had, the median was 100%. It's fun
to have good grades when deserved, but sometimes they feel thrown away and the
only to not get good grades is to willingly not do as asked. (Oh and by the
way, in this class, A+ is given for the 90-100% bracket.)

------
valuegram
"But rising fees and increasing student debt, combined with shrinking
financial and educational returns, are undermining at least the perception
that university is a good investment."

Of course it's not ALWAYS a good investment. It depends on what you're
investing in. That's like saying investing in equities is a bad idea, because
poor choices lead to poor returns.

Why do all of the ballooning student loan conversations lump "college degrees"
together? Area of study has a significant impact. I know of very few engineers
who are being crushed by student debt. Of course if someone chooses to spend
over $100k obtaining a bachelors degree in art, and has problems getting a job
out of school, this has somehow become the fault of the university, or the
United States, or society in general.

------
steve-howard
> [...] students share online tips about “blow off” classes (those which can
> be avoided with no damage to grades) and which teachers are the easiest-
> going.

Do they really think this is a new phenomenon? I can't imagine nobody spread
the word about what classes were easy before the Internet.

~~~
cafard
It has always been known what classes were good for little work and easy
grades. On-line information must have made this more accessible in the largest
schools, but has it really made a difference in those with fewer than 10
thousand undergraduates?

------
joe_the_user
A college education is only four years. A good portion of the value of those
four years is the contact with other intelligent young people. So quality of
the graduates coming out is likely proportional to the quality of the students
admitted.

That is to say, aside from the important other factors mentioned in the
article, the decline of American secondary education clearly is a factor in
the decline of American college education.

~~~
ikono
I'd extend that thought and say the problem with American secondary education
is American primary education; and the problem with American primary education
is American pre-school education or lack there of; and the problem with
American pre-school education or the lack there of is that investing in 3 year
olds requires a long term outlook and patience; two things politicians and
decision makers are incentivized to be deficient in.

~~~
rubidium
Um, investing in 3 year olds is done (assuming raising children is not the
states responsibility) by parents, not politicians... not sure what your point
is here.

~~~
ikono
I'd don't have any particular love for public schools but k-12 is covered by
government in the US. There's no reason that it couldn't or shouldn't extend
down. In my view, education gets harder the older the students are. Regardless
of how many years of school the public decides to fund, I think we should
start as early as possible. There's a compounding effect to education; put in
the time, effort, and money early and you make the future a lot easier.

Nothing can replace good parents but there's only so much that can be done to
improve the general quality of parents. Given that society has a vested
interest in the future of every child, I don't think it's unreasonable for
government to try to do better. That doesn't necessarily mean the public
school system; it could be vouchers, various incentives, etc. But just saying
parents need to do it is a cop out, shortsighted, and unrealistic.

