Will the College System Collapse?

If we scroll back a hundred years, we find that colleges & universities were the provenance of the wealthy class, plus some genuinely gifted intellectuals. The upper middle class, striving to have their progeny join these elites, scrambled to have their place in the system. It was about social connections, prestige, and real learning, too.
Then came the GI bill, (bless it) and a large middle class got larger. At the end of four years-- even English majors had better paying jobs to choose from and the standard of the education was high. A BA meant a person was culturally literate and had deep knowledge in their major, at least. Those with real intellectual tendencies, those for whom ideas were as real as anything else out there, continued on to PhD and to teaching in same universities.

That was then. Before almost two thousand (!!!) four-year colleges and everyone-should-have-a-college-degree, (even a receptionist or a sales rep were at an advantage for being hired if they had gone to college) and the jungle of government loans for any and all of the above.
Now we are here.

I can’t imagine a collapse, but changes are inevitable. It’s all about the job possibilities awaiting the graduates. As more bonafide and un-sensational headlines about what buys what become evident, adjustments will follow. Follow the money, as someone else said.

I still think a college degree from a great university that gets to pick its students is worth a lot if you can afford it without debt. Hanging around and making friends with intelligent people is never a waste. But sixty thousand $ (or even twenty thousand $, with aid) for a middle class family with more than one child is questionable.

@em2424, the past is not prologue.

Since the '70’s, inequality has increased and there has been more globalization and trade (while immigration was opened in the '60’s). But that doesn’t mean that trends run one way forever. The US has shifted between growing inequality and growing egalitarianism before. The last time the US was so unequal was around the beginning of the 20th century, when financial flows and trade were amazingly open (Brits and Americans were speculating in S America, Germany, etc).

Then WWI happened, the US shut down most immigration in the '20’s, and trade flows were stopped by tariffs during the Great Depression. WWII and the Cold War united Americans, and income levels in the US compressed as powerful unions brought millions of Americans in to the middle class until the '70’s.

It seems that we are at an inflection point as we are already producing too many lawyers, which is the yeast that will raise the bread.

This is worth a look:
http://socialevolutionforum.com/2013/02/08/the-double-helix-of-inequality-and-well-being/
http://socialevolutionforum.com/2013/11/10/bimodal-lawyers-how-extreme-competition-breeds-extreme-inequality/

“The final thought. Revolutions are often made by frustrated elite aspirants. There is a disproportionate number of lawyers among them. Abraham Lincoln, the leader of what really amounted to the Second American Revolution was, of course, a lawyer. And so were Vladimir Lenin and Fidel Castro…”

Here’s where I disagree the strongest with the opinions in this thread - $20-60,000 for a middle class family with more than one child is probably the best investment (other than a house) one can make based on monetary and non-monetary factors. I would borrow every last cent I could because the potential LIFETIME payback can be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and more importantly, non-quantifiable benefits including self-esteem and happiness. I would go without cable tv, trade down in my car, borrow - whatever it takes. This is a long-term trade. There is no worse feeling than looking back on your life and realizing you didn’t reach your full potential because you were too risk-averse to take on some debt and make sacrifices. How much is meeting the spouse of your dreams at a great college worth? 20k? 60k? Priceless?

@PurpleTitan‌

I agree that markets don’t go straight up and that there are corrections. However, there is always a bid for the best real estate and the best education and a limit to how far the price can fall. With millions of Chinese, Indians, (and whoever is next), entering the middle class, I would make a bet on US higher education. I don’t understand why you wouldn’t go into debt to get a college degree from a great, near-great, or even average US university. I do understand the points of others in this thread, it’s scary to go into debt for a payoff that might come far in the future and everyone’s situation and risk tolerance is different. I guess I’m just more bullish on the higher education product than others, but that’s what makes markets.

@em2424, I’m not going to speak for women since I am not one, but I daresay that most guys believe that they can meet the spouse of their dreams many places outside of college, and that whether they do or not will be dependent on luck, of course, but also more their own accomplishments than where they go to college.

Also, you are extrapolating (the next 40 years may not be like the last 40 years) and have some weird notions. In general, a house is a poor investment over the long-run. The only reason people think otherwise is because localized housing bubbles can run a loooong time. As in, many decades and up to a lifetime.

And yes, there is always a bid and a limit to how far something might fall, but that limit may be much closer to zero than you are assuming. What was the bid (for anything) during the Great Depression?

For example, at one point before 1900, housing prices in the US reached a point that wasn’t reached again (in real terms) until 1980/1990:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/07/updating-the-case-shiller-100-chart-forecast/

@PurpleTitan‌

I agree with your point about meeting a spouse being a bit silly. I more meant it as a proxy for non-monetary gains. I also said upfront that there will be winners and losers and I think the better schools will keep on winning. I also agree that in a depression-like scenario everything suffers, but I’m willing to bet the demographics will be benign or better for US higher education. I realize this is probably a contrarian view, at least on this forum.

@JackCW‌

You have asked a very intelligent question IMO, and a lot rides on what the answer will turn out to be. Unfortunately, there are several major objective factors that will influence the outcome, most of which have been brought up here, and several subjective factors that remain significant, one or two of which have also been brought up here. With that many variables in play, coming to a conclusion that has a decent level of confidence that it is correct is nearly impossible. But it is fun to talk about.

So for example. there is always the debate about the purpose of a college education being to get a good job when you are finished (what I call the trade school side, although of course I don’t mean that literally) and those that think the more important purpose is to hone a level of intellectual awareness, communication skills and critical thinking that allows one to lead a more fulfilling life and be a better contributor to our democracy and society. I am the first to admit the pendulum has swung towards the former over the last couple of decades, and certainly even though I favor the latter I don’t dispute that getting a good job upon graduation and being reasonably ready to perform at that job is important as well. But I think it is a mistake to only look at what was spent on college and decide its worth solely based on starting salary when you get out.

Having said that, borrowing anything north of $40,000 or so for all 4 years of college is, not to hold back, completely insane IMO. So if you can get into and attend an elite college without going into significant debt, then great. No problem. Whether that money comes from family wealth, merit scholarships, or great need-based aid from that college doesn’t matter. It is only what you owe when you are finished that counts. If one cannot achieve a level of available, non-borrowed money so that the bill at the end of each school year is $10,000 or less, then one should definitely look at one’s state school and other options. Because you (or whoever said it) are absolutely correct, one can achieve an excellent education at any state school in this country. And I wouldn’t even qualify it, as I think you did, that the teachers might not be as good. At some of these elite schools the profs might be more famous, but that doesn’t always make them good teachers or mean that they will actually show up to teach at all, but instead hand it off to a fairly green TA who also might or might not be a very effective teacher. Most profs at any flagship state school, and even at most non-flagship locations, know their subjects well.

As others have pointed out, there is a great deal of financial aid at these very expensive schools most of the time. Almost all have need-based aid, and quite a few have merit scholarships. But even for the ones that don’t have the latter, they often have very wide parameters for who qualifies for need based aid. That’s not to say there still isn’t a middle class squeeze in many cases, especially for the average student. But generally speaking the average student isn’t getting into a highly competitive (admissions) university and so should probably be looking at the state school alternative if the family is not wealthy.

Anyway, this could be a book, and in fact there have been several books on this exact question. It is a fascinating area to discuss and engage in speculation.

On, and BTW, while it is certainly true that UChicago markets like crazy and likes being able to brag about an acceptance rate that rivals HYPS, the biggest reason for the changes you mention is that is when they went on the Common Application. It was at that point the number of applicants rose dramatically.

@PurpleTitan‌

I am not sure that your statement about college tuition being in line with inflation for the last couple of decades or so is correct. Using the example of the OP, tuition essentially doubled from 2000 to 2014. Now without actually doing the exact math, i know a 7% increased every year means that thing doubles every 10 years. So this would appear to represent a rate increase of about 5% annually. All the numbers I can find say that inflation in this country over that same time period has been about 2.0-2.5%. That’s a pretty significant difference, if I am right. Certainly every story I heard on any news program discussing college costs always had a line that said almost verbatim “College costs have significantly outpaced inflation”. Even taking into account the increased financial aid, which I agree has been happening, It is still discounting from a significantly higher sticker price.

If you have the time to find more exact numbers, you might prove my “back of the envelope” calculations wrong. But as I said, all the chatter that has been out in there over that time frame would seem to indicate college costs rising faster than prices in general.

Where am I? French College Confidential?

@fallenchemist‌

Am I the only one here that thinks “borrowing anything north of $40,000 or so for all 4 years of college…” can make sense in a lot of situations? There are some professions, finance for example, where a degree is a first screen (not saying that’s right - just the reality) and alumni networks are key. I’m not saying there aren’t exceptions, but it’s the general rule in some sectors.I also agree you can get a great education at less expensive options, but I would also go into debt for those, as I mentioned earlier.

(Just offering a slow clap for post #16 by @notrichenough‌.)

@em2424‌

Oh, I am sure you are not the only one, and it is a bit of a generalization, and the $40K number is certainly somewhat arbitrary. Until recently I was saying $35K. Certainly one can potentially justify more borrowing for an engineering degree or others where the probability of higher initial salaries is there. But I think one would have to be very confident that will be the case. Otherwise you become another NY Times story of a student with $100,000+ in debt and their life (and often their parents who cosigned the loans) essentially in tatters. Because unlike most debt, student loans cannot be discharged via bankruptcy. Not that bankruptcy is a great way to start ones professional life either.

@fallenchemist, note that I said average net tuition, so tuition costs after fin aid and merit aid (both of which have increased substantially at different schools). So average net tuition increases have been close to inflation. The list cost has definitely increased at a rate far higher than inflation, which tends to hurt well-off kids unwilling or unable to take merit money, but the income of those families had been increasing at a rate above inflation as well (though even the upper-middle class has stalled with the 2 big recessions of last decade). The other group hurt has been middle-class and poor kids who aren’t good enough to get merit money or in to a school with generous fin aid, but that’s due in part to withdrawal of state support for state schools. A package of Stafford loans+Pell grant+work-study hasn’t been enough to pay for a private college for a long time now, but it wasn’t too long ago when such a package was enough to cover full in-state costs at even the most expensive public college.

I actually wonder about competition from quality on-line programs as more raised-on-technology students approach college age, and as technology advances. There are quite a number of degrees that one could argue would be attainable without leaving your home. There wouldn’t be the “college experience”, but just think of the accessibility and affordability.

I guess I’m in @em2424‌ 's camp on this. The economics of the educational marketplace make the current college model more ingrained and sustainable in the long run. For the system to collapse, you would need employers to start deciding that they have no need for the highly educated, skilled workers these colleges are producing, and as far as I can see, the demand for an educated workforce is going up, not down.

The only example of where you’ve seen a small deflation in the business model has come in legal education. It started in the job market first; lawyers who were used to $160,000 starting salaries and 100% job placement suddenly were
left begging and holding the bag on huge loans because of the Great Recession of 2008. It took a while to work through the system but five years later, law schools are closing or merging, application numbers are going down, and the quality of applicants have declined. But it’s far from a collapse. Three-quarters of law students still end up with jobs, and Harvard is still turning away four people for every one they accept. It’s just not as go-go as it was ten years ago. And I wouldn’t discount the fact that law school will again return to favor in another ten years, and we’re right back to the go-go years.

I also think it can be reasonable to borrow money–even fairly substantial sums–for a college education. It depends on a number of factors, or course, including what your job prospects will be. How much of a burden will that loan be? People borrow a lot more than 40 grand to buy a home–heck, people borrow tens of thousands to buy new cars. I think a college education can be a much better investment than a new car.

I also think the current system is nowhere near collapse. I do think that private colleges that aren’t highly selective will start having some serious financial problems, though, and some of them will either change significantly or go out of business.

Not without the means to pay it back. And if your life blows up you can get out from under a car loan or mortgage. This is not true for student loans,

I don’t remember the exact stat, but some ridiculous number of college grads are underemployed, working for peanuts and part-time hours. Hopefully this is because of the recession and not because we are producing too many college grads for the number of jobs that truly requires a college education.

I agree with 3puppies - the American system of post secondary education will not collapse, but it is evolving. Ironically, it used to be that only the wealthy and some of the fortunate middle-class went to college. I suspect it will evolve into a system where many go to Community Colleges or universities that offer a lot of on-line classes, will get credentialed and move into the work force. Only the wealthy and the few fortunate enough to get substantial financial aid will be able to opt for the four-year residential college model - much like the old days.

Financial aid <3