I really enjoyed this article. It starts with the rat race competition to the most exclusive schools but then gets into what students should get out of the 4+ years in college.
It’s all great. But there is one tiny problem. If that’s what college is for, then how does it distinguish it from cheaper options - Coursera, edx etc, enough to justify the tuition?
Honestly, I don’t think the current rates for private tuition are justified anywhere, from the perspective of the student. For people with plenty of money, it may not matter. But the tuition discrepency is not proportional to the ratio of added value. (In other words, Harvard may be better than UCLA, but it probably isn’t +$200K better – which is the differential that a full pay California state resident would be looking at over the course of 4 years).
That being said there is a value to the college environment (classroom study vs. online), quality of instruction, academic rigor, etc. But the point is that many students can and will find those things at schools they would consider to be safeties, typically with less expense and angst about gettting in.
I think my D followed this path as far as 1 and 2. She went into college thinking of 2-3 possible majors (they were her favorites in HS) and wound up discovering that she was very good at, and enjoyed, a completely different one (that she really did not enjoy in HS).
3, not so much, just yet, but I can see it as a goal:
Of course, there is also this reason (not necessarily mutually exclusive to any other):
I think that’s the only thing that actually justify tuition of even public state universities that can be cheaper but still expensive to many.
[/quote]
Unless it is an unemployable major at a college without enough pretest to compensate the major’s unemployability.
A Upenn’s semester class can be divided into five Coursera courses. But as the combined five courses, it was claimed to be the identical course with same quality of instruction with same rigor as taught at Upenn. The online collaboration might not be as good as the in-class discussion by Upenn students, but was alive and kicking, and seemed quite good enough. And you can get it for free or a much smaller amount for a certificate.
If not for job, it’s really hard to justify Upeen’s price tag for the course = 1/4 of a semester’s tuition = ~$7,000
enough pretest -> enough name value
I had no concern about employability and paid at some cost to ourselves full pay for colleges that I believed best accorded my kids the experiences of 1-3. I do not believe that anything about Coursera et.al. in anyway emulated that. If you do, more power to you. Lots of money saved.
I believe I got more than my money’s worth for my son and daughter’s college experiences.
@garland, I believe that the colleges are very valuable and worth the money, but only because they offer a lot more than the #1~3 in the op, not that they don’t offer #1~3 or #1~3 are not valuable. Not even #1~4. There are other benefits as well.
My older son knew in 5th grade he wanted to be a computer programmer and chose a college that would give him the best education possible in that field. He was already employable before he started college, but even more employable when he finished. I’m not sure he’s learned to share his enthusiasm, unless you are already pretty far gone as a computer nerd.
Younger son really didn’t know what he wanted to do when he grew up. He majored in IR because it seemed to combine a lot of interests. He tried out NGO work and decided it wasn’t for him. He went to Officer Candidate School after a couple of internships and a job and is now a Naval Officer. There were obviously more direct routes to where he ended up, but I don’t think he’d trade his time at Tufts or his year in Jordan to do them instead.
Opportunities!
College education gives opportunities beyond the above #1~3. That’s why it’s so valuable! (And can’t be replaced by Coursera)
For most students and parents, not having to be concerned about employability is an mythical or unattainable luxury.
Employability never entered our minds. To us, college is solely about the life of the mind and pursuing something you love. If you love to do something, you will make a go of it – even if you have to live in a box under the freeway. That’s what we always told our son, anyway. He grew up knowing that his undergraduate education would be our last financial gift to him, and he could do whatever he wanted with it, absolutely no strings. We thought he’d end up living in an old car traveling around with a camera on his shoulder, but we were pretty sure he’d be happy doing that and that’s all that mattered to us and to him. We will not support him financially in his adulthood because we have our own lives to live and provide for. He’s always known that and has looked forward to making his own way in the world, whatever that eventually looks like for him; money/employability was never the driver, never the goal.
I’ve never understood the argument that you have to be rich to pursue education for education’s sake, and I’ve never understood expecting some form of financial ROI on college. To be well educated is an end in itself, a great gift to oneself and those you share it with. What does money have to do with it? I always figured I could cut hair or learn some other trade to avoid starvation, but I never equated my education or that of our son’s with what I’d /he’d be able to earn. Education, to me, is about the ability to live happily and fully, curiously engaged in one’s mind. For me, the by-product of that internal engagement has always been sufficient to translate into something useful enough to keep me off the streets. I grew up extremely poor, went to beauty school out of high school, and ended up in college by a twist of fate. What I learned there was the magic of books and stories and writing and history and engagement with people and faculty who helped me start to think differently and more deeply about the world around me. I left a very different, better person from the one who entered, and I treasure that mental epiphany and those magical years I almost missed more than anything. That transformation is what education is to me and what I want for our son. A job is not the focus of that equation. I never worry that he’ll find something meaningful to do, and I don’t have any angst about whatever hardships he may face getting to wherever he wants to go. His education will keep him company while he finds his way.
At some point, we’ve turned college into trade school and a financial proposition. I find that tragic, and I think that reduction misses the boat of life by miles. For any who are thinking that there has to be some minumum financial payback for the outrageous cost of the educational experience demanded by most here on CC, let me counter that the type of education I’m talking about can be had at hundreds of schools and at many price points, does not have to be completed in four years or out of state, and does not require a boarding experience. It costs, but it doesn’t have to impoverish. If you let go of any ROI notions, you come closer to my definition of what college is for – acquiring knowledge for the pure love and mental enrichment of it. i believe the rest will take care of itself.
Money matters because most students and families are financially constrained by the costs of college to the point that they would not attend in the absence of any gain in employability. This does not mean that one cannot pursue education for education’s sake as well.
Pretty much all public colleges and universities were established with some thought toward upgrading the skills of the people in order to boost the economy (and hence grow the tax base that will then pay more taxes to increase funding to the government) or educating people for some job of particular interest (e.g. military service academies to educate military officers).
@ChoatieMom, I agree that learning for learning’s sake is a beautiful thing. Books and ideas that might have no immediate employability value can really change your life in a big way. I couldn’t agree more about that, but consider this:
A typical university student probably takes around 38 courses during a Bachelors degree. If we put aside Engineering and maybe a few other specific majors, the typical kid has to take around 15 courses for their major. The core requirements at most universities seem to be around 10 courses if the kid goes in with some AP credits and chooses wisely and kills two birds with one stone where possible.
Let’s say worst case scenario, the kid chooses a major(or second major) they’re interested in, but it’s not their true passion, and they choose it mostly for it’s employability value or as a Plan B if they can’t support themselves with whatever Plan A is. In this case, they’ll have to take 15 courses(major requirements) that aren’t purely for the sake of learning. Let’s call these trade school courses. Let’s also assume that of the 10 core requirement courses, 5 are in areas in which the kid has absolutely no interest. These 5 probably won’t be high employability type courses, but let’s call them trade school since they’re not in an area the kid is truly passionate about.
Of the 38 total courses, that leaves 18 that are completely open. That’s almost 2 full years of school, almost half the courses. That’s a lot of time to indulge yourself in learning for learning’s sake. So even in this worst case scenario, college becomes trade school plus almost two full years of total freedom to explore your interests in just about any field, regardless of how impractical it is. I think that’s a good thing, and a pretty nice balance - not much to ask of someone who needs to start providing for themselves.
I think many students attend college mainly because it’s expected of them. They’re motivated by their parents and peers, they hope to discover their true career interests, and they want to have a good time while doing it. But they may soon discover that that college is like working in a coal mine. “You load sixteen tons, what do you get? Another day older and deeper in debt.” And for those students college is work above all. The goal is survival and a credential.
But while they may well be loading coal a lot – following a curriculum of courses that don’t have much intrinsic interest to them – they ought to value acquiring skills, using new tools, and experimenting and discovering things they didn’t know. The biggest payoff may be in discovering things they didn’t know they didn’t know, but that they come to realize they should know. This happened to my daughter, who went to college to study art but partly by chance discovered in some elective courses that she was interested in environmental studies, environmental design. Now that’s what she teaches and what she promotes. (And they pay her to do this.)
If students can do this – figure out what they should know that they don’t know – they can get a lot out of college. A good general curriculum will offer them a chance to make such discoveries, as well as a way to follow up. Sometimes they can graduate in four years with some new intellectual tools, and have a way to market themselves. Sometimes they will see that they need advanced or specialized education – and enroll in a masters program, perhaps part-time while employed.
To follow up on my previous comment, I’m going to paste something here that I wrote on CC a couple of years ago.
Sometimes when I think of life choices that young people must make, it brings to mind the line from Robert Burns’ “To A Mouse”:
“The best-laid schemes o’ mice an’ men
Gang aft agley,
An’ lea’e us nought but grief an’ pain,
For promis’d joy!”
I’m not trying to be pessimistic but rather realistic. We can plan and scheme, and hope and dream, but stuff happens over which we have little control. Opportunities arise, inspiration comes, but so do roadblocks and dead-ends.
As I have watched my kids’ careers evolve, I couldn’t have predicted either one of them, no matter that the kids were thoughtful and resourceful. But being thoughtful (planful) and resourceful is critical. Very few career lines these days are strictly linear, starting with a college degree and moving into a specific occupation and life career.
Instead careers tend to be broken into segments. I’ve given this metaphor before on this discussion board, but it bears repeating, I think. It comes from a commencement address that I witnessed a few years ago, in which the speaker came to his summation and said. “It is customary in ceremonies like this for the commencement speaker to offer advice on how to proceed up the career ladder after graduation. But I’m not sure the idea of a “ladder” really fits any more – if it ever really did. Instead, in today’s economy careers are more like “climbing walls.” You have goals, objectives you’re trying to attain. But you don’t move straight up. Instead sometimes you go upward, sometimes sideways, sometimes even downward for a while, and sometimes you may need to get off the wall. The important thing is to have an objective and to be flexible and resourceful in finding your way toward it.”
For the OP’s daughter, it’s important to define goals but also to do a constant “resource assessment.” What are her skills and talents, what experiences can she draw on, what interests would she like to follow? She may start out on one path but learn along the way that it’s not what really interests her or it’s a dead-end. What then? Assess where she is then, decide on another move, which could even be getting off the wall to obtain another degree. But she should always be enterprising, use contacts and experiences, and keep open to new paths that fit her evolving interests and talents.
I think my kids’ career lines are very unusual, but they followed this kind of path. Careers develop in segments, and the economy is moving in often unpredictable ways to offer new opportunities. The really important thing for young kids in college and recently out of college is to be able to assess where they are – even if they don’t like their current job, what skill or experience can they draw from it that’s useful for the next move? One skill and resource is networking. There’s no college course in networking. But remaining flexible and taking new opportunities is important.
@ucbalumnus This is not a matter of luxury. A bright student with a degree from college WILL find a job. Both my kids are self-supporting. Neither makes much money. That’s what I meant by not worrying about employability. You can eschew focusing on “career” and still actually live in this world. Not believing that is the myth.
True. Not coincidently, most of them were founded during the heyday of the second industrial revolution, when the country needed more skilled technicians to develop its expanding (and increasingly complex) factory, transportation, business and communication systems. But they almost all have a liberal arts component, too.
Most liberal arts colleges (and the private universities that grew out of them) were founded for different purposes. They were meant to educate thought-leaders for civic and religious life.
Another purpose was to teach the children of affluent families how to make disciplined use of leisure time. With respect to both of these ends, the “liberal” in “liberal education” has to do with liberty and how people use it.
Nowadays, a career might span only about half of a long life (~40 out of 80 years).
Even during a career, work might comprise only about 1/3 of a week day.
Even during work hours, most people in “good” jobs spend much of their time consuming diverse information, analyzing it, communicating about it, and making decisions (not doing manual labor or running errands.)
Most of us want our kids to have one those “good” jobs, which are as much about quality of work as they are about income. We don’t want them spending all their free time smoking pot and playing “adults only” video games. Most of us (I hope) also would prefer our national leaders not to be narcissistic blowhards who spend hours per day making groundless, ad hominem attacks on their critics. Thoughtful, curious, liberally educated people are less apt to do those things. That in my opinion is what college is for.
That type of education can be achieved outside of college. Indeed in many countries, the secondary school system provides it. There is not that much evidence that most American universities actually improve student skills in critical thinking, analysis, or writing, sadly.