Even the Ivies know their model is in danger

Parents Forum
121

<p>Agree that “College has always been elitist and exclusionary,”</p>

<p>Maybe the current trend of going back to the system of the college being unaffordable for the majority of common citizens is just a regression to the norm, if we look at the big picture. By no means I would claim this is desirable.</p>

<p>DS’s college love to talk about their residential colleges. I read from several sources that it is actually not an economical and efficient way to run a college, e.g., more than 10 eateries instead of just a few of them when so much emphasis is put on quality, choices, individuality rather than quantity, few choices and uniformity (say, each residential college has its own customized plate, special characteristic of the college, special events and “traditions” and its own separately managed endowment!) But this is not a bit a concern for those who belong to the group of elitists, in the past, now and likely in the future.</p>

122

<p>On a similar note, see the September cover story in The Atlantic.
<a href=“The Future of College? - The Atlantic”>The Future of College? - The Atlantic;

123

<p>While money does make a difference, it does not necessarily take big bucks to have that “ideal and romantic” experience. In some developing countries, life at even the best universities can be quite bare and the facilitates are far from “state of the art”, but it doesn’t stop students there from dreaming the wildest dreams, developing lifelong friendships and finding the life shaping inspirations in that not so shiny ivory tower… “Bricks and mortar” makes a difference.</p>

124

<p>

Universities in many countries of Europe in particular don’t charge tuition or have negligible tuition fees. You can get a top-notch education at a fantastic university in Europe for a relatively small sum of money. Even in the UK, with its relatively high tuition rates, students don’t pay back loans until they’re making enough money (currently £21,000). It’s a very different system from that of the US, for sure. </p>

<p>

Seems pretty standard. The internet in general has decreased student attentiveness, I think. I don’t have any control over lectures, but I’ve banned laptops from my discussion sections – no browsing Facebook in my classroom. The newest trend is students who take pictures of powerpoint slides with their phones as notes (texting all the while, of course). Good grief.</p>

<p>This Duke grad took a Coursera class for the first time this summer, mostly because I knew the prof (at Emory) personally and had some preexisting knowledge of the subject matter. I found it reasonably interesting – not as good as a seminar setting, for sure, but a decent way of learning new material. </p>

125

<p>In those places where education is less expensive, they ration it by limiting the number of people eligible to attend. They track, for example, in Germany starting at 12. Of course, they have a strong vocational schooling, and this is no barrier to rising in the business world. </p>

<p>However, the European systems are, if anything, more elitist and exclusionary than our own, regardless of the differences in costs. Further, I believe the rapid rise in tuition costs was a matter of very large student protests in the UK not long ago. </p>

<p><a href=“Tuition fees increase led to 15,000 fewer applicants | Tuition fees | The Guardian”>http://www.theguardian.com/education/2012/aug/09/tuition-fees-increase-15000-less-applicants&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Yes, inspite of the protests in 2010, the rates were hiked to 9000 pounds, which given the exchange rate means 15000 dollars in tuition.</p>

<p>sure, not as expensive as our expensive state schools, but certainly not cheap, by any standard, either. Not free. Not minimal.</p>

126

<p>@xiggi‌

</p>

<p>It’s funny how conservatives in this country are in favor of privatizing everything except the one thing private industry is designed to do: job training. For some strange reason they feel that after pouring billions into K-12, tax should foot the bill for training private industry’s entry-level employees. One more mark of the Walmart economy.</p>

127

<p>I want to caution posters not to let this degenerate into a political discussion.
Thanks
ED - Mod</p>

128

<p>

</p>

<p>Cheap criticism! What is your alternative? A continuation of a the one model fits all that results in massive dropouts and the need for colleges to have to offer remedial classes to an army of future dropouts? </p>

<p>What is so wrong about colleges developing marketable skills? Are parents really not footing the ever increasing bills while hoping their children will learn something that might translate into … a job? </p>

<p>I guess we should start a thread right here on CC with a title along the lines “After four years, I am so happy to have my son back. He learned to climb walls and has hundreds of FB buddies for life. All the Greek philosophers he knows come in two or three letters. He still can’t balance a check book or pay any bills. But I am happy!” </p>

<p>It is acceptable to have a romantic view of education, but in the end, there is nothing wrong with maintaining an iota of realism. With expenses ranging in the hundreds of thousand dollars for a “lifetime” of learning, we ought to measure the cost/rewards balance periodically. </p>

129

<p>I usually don’t post on this forum but love following and all I can say is Amen. Thank you xiggi for summing it up for a lot of us out here. When 100,000-200,00 becomes chump change for the regular guy then I will have a more “romantic” relationship with education.</p>

130

<p>I don’t think there are many jobs available in academia anymore, unless one is willing to go into administration. The teaching part is not really a very good living. </p>

<p>I think the “problem” with some of the thinking about education is that it really does come from a type of elitism which says education for educations’s sake, which, by the way, I ascribe to myself. On the other hand, colleges and universities increasingly market themselves along the line of jobs and careers, and one of the persistent arguments FOR universal education is employment. (we can’t deny this)</p>

<p>Oddly, I find all the potential new delivery methods serve both of these missions in many ways. For the lifelong learner, who sees education for educations sake as a desirable, we can access all sorts of classes and great minds at a really reasonable rate, and for those who need education for economic job reasons at a reasonable rate, it offers a solution.</p>

<p>It does not offer the same social or “ideal” return. But, I don’t think that many 24 year olds want to go live on campus and have the lifestyle. I think that’s a very short term lifestyle choice, most of us hope for for our own kids. But, it may not be the only way to educate, and it may only be the best way during a very short period of a lifetime.</p>

131

<p>

</p>

<p>Are you sure this represents the typical college student? Perhaps. But I know that in my classes, at least a third to a half (and maybe more) are working some sort of part-time for significant hours (20+ a week)–and it’s not a campus work study job–more like waitress, day-care worker, motel receptionist, Starbucks manager, deli sandwich maker, farmer (yes, true!), etc…</p>

<p>My view would be that the above quote would characterize what happens at most elite colleges where I suspect finding a job isn’t much of a problem for the typical grad, or even getting into a good graduate or professional program. But this is only a stereotype on my part, and I haven’t really checked to see.</p>

<p>I am uncomfortable with the idea that the problem with finding good middle-class jobs is traceable a problem with higher education–that somehow students are not being trained very well or lack the appropriate marketable skills. I have yet to see a claim that the latest problem with the business cycle and the cause of the recession was traced to a problem with higher education. </p>

<p>With respect to the humanities, which get a bad rap all around, the situation may be more complex than people think:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>It is true that students in engineering do have a much better chance of being employed, but not all students are going to be engineers. The interesting part here is computer science.</p>

<p>source:<a href=“The Best Argument for Studying English? The Employment Numbers - The Atlantic”>The Best Argument for Studying English? The Employment Numbers - The Atlantic;

132

<p>I assume this article has been posted upthread somewhere?
<a href=“Education and Innovation: Time for a Change | HuffPost Latest News”>HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost;

133

<p>I am saying that I expect MORE than classes from college education. Does that make me an “elitist”? What if I say that I too agree that the cost of Higher education in this country is out of control? Apparently I am the minority here so I will peace out myself. :)</p>

134

<p>“Even the Ivies know their model is in danger”</p>

<p>When the Ivies close up shop please let me know. TYIA. </p>

135

<p>Yeah. They are the ones proposing the changes in the article and it is an ivy professor in the article I posted who is talking about the need to change and move with the technological times. Whether he is right or wrong, please at least have an interesting opinion and don’t just ■■■■■.</p>

<p>@Benley, what you are saying you want pressuppoeses the time and money to get that. In the meantime, we do need other alternatives in a world in which continuing and less expensive options are necessary.</p>

<p>I agree your ideal is ideal. But it is only ideal for a short time in life. :ar! </p>

<p>You don’t have to peace out, dude. We care what you are saying.</p>

136

<p>Here’s another thought. If MOOCs are the answer to the rising cost of higher education, which means that we will no longer need bricks and mortar institutions, I’m wondering how many families prefer to have their children live on campus rather than commute? In other words, for those families who have sent their children to live on campus, but also have that have <em>some</em> institution of higher learning that is within a reasonable commuting distance, why didn’t they go for the cheaper alternative??</p>

<p>And I wonder how many of those students who live on campus do actually have some institution of higher learning closer by so that they could get some of their education by staying at home and not paying for room and board?</p>

<p>I know that there are large numbers of high school graduates who go off to our state flagship but could stay home and do community college for a couple of years right here in the city, which would be cheaper. So we are saying that when MOOCs become widely available, these same students would chose the MOOC and not go to their bricks-and-mortar institution, because it is more affordable. But why didn’t we see a run to community colleges, at least for part of a student’s education, as the price went up. What will cause this run to MOOCs?</p>

137

<p>@skrlvr I don’t think anyone thinks this will ever make brick and mortar institutions irrelevant. I really don’t see anyone even advocating for that, or discussing it, certainly not me, and certainly not in the article.</p>

<p>I think what is being said is that we probably need a combination, and, of course, given the number of online options being offered by many U’s at this point, we clearly do need this. I don’t see it as one or the other, but and/and. I know this makes for a less dramatic argument on a message board, but for me, at this point, looking at it, and I had no opinion one way or the other when I made the OP, I’ve decided, with other reading as well, that we will need both.</p>

<p>Primarily, just looking at the pure numbers of people we have to educate, retrain and continuing educate, in the global tech economy, I don’t even think the brick and mortars can handle it. Just for one thing.</p>

138

<p>

</p>

<p>The community colleges still suffer from a perceived lower quality and lack of prestige associated with associate degrees. The MOOCs are capitalizing (or trying to capiltalize) on the reputation of their schools and have yet to realize that such offering requires a LOT more than recycling lectures with a cheap camera or hoping it will NOT require additional resources and investments.</p>

<p>In a way, in today’s WIP there might little difference in attending a lecture in a giant hall with hundreds of peers or watching a delayed video … except for the addition of sections led by (a tad) more advanced peers. </p>

<p>Ultimately, we might end up with an “a la carte” education system where a student might choose between various models of education provided by the same “name” teacher. You want Mankiw … well, you can “buy” his seminars at 5,000 a semester and might see him a few times IRL… Or you might purchse the tape lectures with TAs for 3,000. Or simply sign up for the MOOC at 1,000 for credit or at 200 for the education and a non-credit certificate. </p>

<p>Actually, the “modest” proposal should have been offered a long time instead of the outright thievery at schools that rely on the Diva cum TAs/GSI model at the full price. </p>

<p>But, obviously, the ;largest problem still remains to “re-convince” that professors ought to dedicate more time on actually … teaching students. Not an easy task! </p>

139

<p>@xiggi–Perhaps you know this better than I, but how many professors, out of the total number of profs in higher education, are actually at research institutions? And for you, how many students/classes should a professor teach? Of course, that might vary with subjects, but is higher education as a whole full of these professors who do little teaching? Or just at specific institutions?</p>

<p>Here’s my experience–I teach in a humanities subject, and I teach 6 classes (and two more in the summer for extra pay). I am at a Carnegie I research institution, so I am expected to publish and do scholarly activity/research, though my own department has no Ph.D program. I teach at the 100 level all the way up to the master’s level. I usually teach 70 students a semester, with no TA or grader. My salary about 70K. I have been teaching for 20 years, and I have won 2 teaching awards–one by student vote, one from my colleagues. I have also published in the three best journals in my field.</p>

<p>I have many colleagues who are research faculty in the humanities who have similar course loads/students, with similar awards and better publication and track records. </p>

<p>Are we research divas?</p>

<p>Whitman College, a top LAC according to College Confidential, recently went to a 3/2 course load. So at this teaching institution, they actually have fewer courses to teach than I do, and I am at a research institution. I also imagine they are teaching fewer students in those classes, since they have a lower teacher to student ratio. I don’t know if they are expected to do research and publish, though I suspect they are.</p>

<p>Would you say that the professors at this LAC need to be reconvinced to teach? </p>

<p>I have a friend at a community college–he is also in the humanities, and teaches 10 classes a year. He probably teaches around 150 students a semester. He has no research requirement. However, he also assigns fewer papers than I do during the course of a term.</p>

<p>He is clearly not a research diva, but do you think that his students are necessarily getting a better educational experience than my students, (all things being equal) since he has no research expectations?</p>

<p>I know all of this is anecdotal. And I think, in the past, that you have said your opinion is based on your own experiences/anecdotes, though I could be wrong about this. </p>

<p>So it’s not that I am convinced that this issue is settled, but I wish that you wouldn’t use such charged language (as in ‘research diva’). I don’t doubt that there are some of them out there, but does that represent a significant majority of faculty at even 4 year institutions?</p>

140

<p>

</p>

<p>Even among college graduates, it is likely that a majority attended college as commuters, rather than having the “full residential college experience”.</p>