<p>The problem is the article and the anecdotes presented do not support the premise and a few of us noticed. In other words, the author did no examining at all and people who are predisposed to believing the bad news, just do. And, drift a lot when this is pointed out. It happens frequently lately on all topics.</p>
<p>Aren’t there two separate questions; the strength of the applicant and the strength/rigor of the alma mater? You cant put HBCUs in one basket. I will hazard a guess that a job applicant from Oakwood may find himself or herself at a disadvantaged when competing with an applicant from Spelman, Morehouse, North Carolina A&T or Tuskegee.</p>
<p>LakeWashington Noone has put HBCUs in one basket in this thread. I mentioned Oakwood’s merit award standards to highlight the level of academics of the students at Oakwood and whether that would be a factor in Mr. Ewers difficulties in getting employment rather than the fact that he is Black. </p>
<p>The article is trying to make the link that Mr. Ewers ethnicity is the reason for his lack of employment and not the many other factors that are race neutral. Many of us have pointed out the lack of information in the article that could help us get a fuller understanding about whether race is a factor or not. One simple data that could have been provided was Mr. Ewer’s college GPA. As we know, many companies have a minimum threshold for GPA to apply and if Mr. Ewer could not apply because his GPA was low that would be a significant hurdle to employment as a recent grad that has nothing to do with his race.</p>
<p>The article just doesn’t provide much information than the data that Black graduates have a higher unemployment rate than White graduates. Had the article provided information about Blacks and Whites with similar GPA , college majors, graduating from peer colleges and showing the different employment rates then you have a good basis for the premise of the article but as it stands this article is just poor journalism.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am afraid that you are holding an overly romantic view of the level of education in this country and are allowing you to paint it in … broad colors. Beyond the colleges that attract a larger percentage of blacks, there are plenty of target the lower performing students of ALL races, and this includes White, Brown, Reds and Yellows from all SES ranges. </p>
<p>We have a big problem in this country in terms of graduating students (if they graduate at all) with a reasonable set of skills and should not blindly hope that colleges should redress a dozen years of subpar education that has been doled out to the masses of future Walmart workers. Some have said --cynically-- that the system works as intended as our “service” country needs a large workforce of low-skilled and low-paid employees. </p>
<p>xiggi Not sure what your point is about my post as it was in specific reference to the Oakwood grad’s employment difficulties. I would agree that this issue of low performing students are in ALL races and SES ranges, but the article doesn’t go into that does it? My posts addressed the specifics of the article.</p>
<p>If you wish to discuss your topic of unpreparedness of ALL students then you are welcome to start a new thread. So no brush was used to paint “broad colors.” </p>
<p>VOR, I addressed the underlying message in this line:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps I missed a fine distinction, but I read the “likes of Oakwood” as a proxy for historically Black institutions of higher learning. </p>
<p>Did you not mean to write that the “greatest” proportion of such students attend schools like Oakwood? Or did you use Oakwood in a generic form to describe a certain type of school and not its particular racial distribution? </p>
<p>xiggi Just like any school that awards merit scholarships to 2.0 GPA students but I know you already knew that or at least should have. Don’t know why you would think that I would single out HBCUs. I guess being a wordsmith like you are it comes with the territory.</p>
<p>But addressing the article, journalist need to provide a better framework when one raises race based issues.</p>
<p><<<
Wouldn’t that apply to all state universities and community colleges, which use state funding to educate college students, not all of whom succeed? Whether the funding is in the form of need-based financial aid, merit scholarships, or subsidy to lower in-state tuition, this argument basically claims that any such funding is “wasted” on students who do not graduate (and many of these schools are not very selective or open admission, so they end up with a lot of students who do not graduate).</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>If merit doesn’t come from taxpayers, then it’s less of an issue…but the fact that someone EARNS a merit award (GPA and test scores) suggests that they were at least “college ready,” rather than just giving taxpayer aid to someone with a high school diploma (who isn’t college ready). </p>
<p>I think Pell should have some kind of GPA/test score req’t…somewhat similar to what Florida does with Bright Futures. However, I would allow that CC students could “earn” their right to get the money by success.</p>
<p>I would rather see more money go to those who have demonstrated the likelihood that they will graduate, then have low funding because it’s spread out to include those who are just wasting time.</p>
<p>This Canadian study seems to suggest that if you are not a member of the majority culture, attending a top school is strongly recommended. If you are from the majority culture, it does not seem to matter much (as far as looking for work goes).
<a href=“http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/frances-woolley/do-employers-care-about-a-universitys-reputation/article2313152/”>http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/frances-woolley/do-employers-care-about-a-universitys-reputation/article2313152/</a></p>
<p>If this is true, then what this professor is suggesting is not so far-fetched:
<a href=“How liberal students could change affirmative action debate (essay)”>https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2013/10/18/how-liberal-students-could-change-affirmative-action-debate-essay</a></p>
<p>Curious how many white liberals would take the challenge… Should I hold my breath?</p>
<p>As to the idea of less qualified students attending college, every intitiative extended to a large group of people will have successes and failures. Statistics may describe large groups in general, but in the end, each person is unique with an uncertain outcome. Choosing to accept a wider range of students may result in different overall results. </p>
<p>If a college is highly selective, it will have a high graduation rate, in part, because it has selected the most competitive students. One could conclude that a college that is more inclusive, that accepts students with weaker academic records, is taking a higher risk in terms of graduation rates. However, does that mean that education dollars are wasted? Could a 30% graduation rate actually be considered a success if without the college, some students might have no chance at more education at all? The person who is most at risk is the low income student who takes on debt and doesn’t graduate, and is left with that debt, but one could argue that not allowing a student a chance to succeed is worse. Colleges with low graduation rates are making efforts to improve them. </p>
<p>The article doesn’t give much information about the job-seeking students except for race. Efforts to eliminate discrimination are certainly needed, however, we should also take a closer look at our current education system in hopes of seeking how to better prepare students for the job market. </p>
<p>Well, white liberals have given up many places by implementing affirmative action policies.</p>
<p>An individual decision not to apply for or attend a top school would be as silly as the argument that if you support higher taxes, you are free to write the IRS a bigger check. </p>
<p>Canuckguy, that Inside Higher Ed piece has to be satire…how ridiculous.</p>
<p>“Could a 30% graduation rate actually be considered a success if without the college, some students might have no chance at more education at all? The person who is most at risk is the low income student who takes on debt and doesn’t graduate, and is left with that debt, but one could argue that not allowing a student a chance to succeed is worse. Colleges with low graduation rates are making efforts to improve them.”</p>
<p>It depends on whose money it is and how much of it is available for experiments, I suppose. Individually, if a student takes on debt for a worthless diploma that is not a great idea, although part of that problem is requiring a diploma as a barrier to entry for jobs that don’t require a diploma to perform. And. of course, there are always cheaper paths such as CC’s and state schools.Many of these other for profit places don’t care at all about improving anything but are going to take the taxpayer money if it’s available, obviously. And, it’s not a race thing at all because there are lots of schools besides HBCU’s that do this routinely.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, the CCs and state schools are subsidized by your tax dollars. Given the prevalence of them, it is reasonable to conclude that subsidized (at least for in-state students) post-secondary education (including CCs which are non-selective) reflects the political consensus that people deserve another chance, and that even a relatively low success rate for those enrolling is better (both for them and society as a whole) than not offering them the chance in the first place.</p>
<p>CC’s are non-selective and cheap and I have a kid that went for free somehow and we are not even low income but he applied for a fee waiver and got it and I had nothing to do with this so am unsure exactly how it happened but he said most people don’t apply because it’s a lot of paperwork and not that well publicized. Anyway, he attended for 2 years and graduated with a 4.0 and applied to two pretty good and well known colleges and got into his first choice and has a job lined up as a third-year. So, I am not opposed to subsidized CC’s at all although if he had to pay he would have figured that out, too. So maybe, you are misunderstanding my comment or something which was more about the for-profit expensive places and not the CC’s and even in-state schools. </p>
<p>ucbalumnus wrote “that even a relatively low success rate for those enrolling is better (both for them and society as a whole) than not offering them the chance in the first place.”</p>
<p>At Oakwood only about 40% graduate in 6 years which means about 60% do not graduate. So are you saying that the benefit to the 40% outweigh the detriment to the 60% who are saddled by student loan debt? </p>
<p>It is well reported that the average college graduate earns more than the average high school graduate but what is not well reported is that the bottom 25% of college graduates earn about the same as an average high school graduate. The big difference for the bottom 25% of college graduates and the average high school graduate is that the latter does not have student loan debt to repay.</p>
<p>Where do you think many of the Oakwood graduates are in the college graduate percentile ranks? At the top? Middle? or bottom 25%? If you think that many Oakwood graduates are at the bottom 25% of college graduates, then even graduating with a college degree would not be beneficial. This would be the case with ALL college graduates who go to college and are at the bottom 25%. </p>
<p>Which college graduates do you think are most likely to be in the bottom 25% of college graduates? Those that went to better ranked schools or those who went to schools that give merit awards to freshman with 2.0 GPA?</p>
<p>Oakwood has fewer than 2,000 students, so it is insignificant compared to all of the community colleges and low-selectivity state universities around. Are you suggesting that access to community colleges and low-selectivity state universities, where students comparable to those who would be admitted to Oakwood may also be admitted, be reduced?</p>
<p>I think some for profit colleges are exploitative and I would not recommend them for anyone. However, I think some are committed to educating students, and for state colleges, I think some funding is dependent on graduation rates. I don’t know of any private colleges that meet full need, so the students must be expected to pay something, which means lower income students are likely to take out loans. </p>
<p>The low income student who does not successfully complete a degree that leads to employment is in a tough predicament. I could give examples of students who are in this situation. I could also give examples of higher income students who dropped out too, but as far as I know, these students don’t have the severity of debt their lower income counterparts do. </p>
<p>I don’t think the government gives out money without expecting results. The student must be enrolled for a certain number of credit hours and must sucessfully pass them. If the student drops too many classes, or shows a trend of poor grades, that student is likely to be called into the financial aid office to discuss the situation. From what I know, if the student drops out, whatever funding that student got for credits not passed- will need to be paid back. Now, how aggressively that student is pursued or if the loan is forgiven, I don’t know.</p>
<p>Once leaving the university, the student can not return without paying what is owed, and the university will not release the transcript if there are any fees due. (that’s a general rule for everyone). The student can enroll in a CC, but is already further in debt.</p>
<p>I would be an advocate for financial counseling before a student enrolls. I don’t know if it is done. Sometimes I wonder if some students are fully aware of the consequences of borrowing money for college. </p>
<p>I agree that in any population, some will be at the top 25% and some will be in the bottom. What to do? A student may not be at the top in academics but can still have skills for employment. In other countries, students are tracked early on in school and some go on to a technical track and some stay in academics. This would be unacceptable in the US. However, are we losing students who could do a good job in a technical area by pushing them to be unhappy or unsuccessful in college? I don’t know. I don’t think we can or should restrict opportunities, but are we designing education to fit student’s stregnths or are we trying to change some students to fit a program that may not be the best fit for them? I don’t have an answer. </p>
<p>ucb Not suggesting that “access” to college be reduced, but that the information to those who are not college ready and would most likely be in the bottom 25% of college graduates be provided so that they understand the consequences of taking that step to college and the cost/benefit associated with that decision.</p>
<p>It has been a growing mantra by politicians, educators, and the media that getting a college degree will lead to higher income and a better life. For most college graduates, this is true. But to 1 in 4 college graduates, this is not. </p>
<p>I am sure that there are many graduates of Oakwood who utilize their degrees and live happily with good paying jobs but I would guess that there are many more that do not. But I would suspect that those Oakwood graduates that do succeed are not the ones who were given merit scholarships with a 2.0 high school GPA. </p>
<p>Those low achieving students at Oakwood and schools like Oakwood (for xiggi not just HBCUs but ALL schools) are being sold a bill of goods that if they just get their degree that all will be fine and that they will live the American Dream, but as Mr. Ewers is finding out that might not be the case, Black or White, if he is in the bottom 25% of college graduates his income will not be much better than an average high school graduate, but he will have the additional baggage of student loans.</p>
<p>Penny This issue is not a low income student problem, but ALL low achieving student problem. The only real difference is High SES low achieving students who are in the bottom 25% of college graduates have family who can bail them out of student loan debt but for the rest in the bottom 25% the loans can be a great burden for much of their lives.</p>
<p>I agree with your point about counseling students about taking out loans to pay for college, and also some kind of career advice about the options available. I think keeping free choice open is important, but I don’t know if we do a good job of infoming students about their options, costs and risks. </p>