By Professor Doom
There’s no
question that higher education has been in freefall (at many, not all of our
institutions). Fingers are being pointed in all directions, from self-absorbed
students, to lazy faculty, to bloated administration, to useless accreditation,
to my favorite #1 culprit, the student loan scam. While all of the previous
have played their part, take away the student loan scam financing it all and
the rest become non-issues no matter how you look at it.
A recent
article manages to point the finger at the Department of Education, listing
seven ways higher education is worse today than it was in that “mythical golden
age” the old professors talk about. I doubt such an age ever existed, but there
is no doubt that higher education was far better in the past than it is today.
Let’s look at the
7 ways higher education is worse, as per the article:
First, of
course, education costs have soared. Tuition fees rose more than three percent
a year in inflation-adjusted terms, far faster than people’s incomes. As new research from the New York Federal Reserve Bank demonstrates, rising federal student financial aid
programs are the primary factor in this phenomenon.
Hey, I agree this
is far worse than higher education of the past, which was relatively cheap by
comparison. But is this really the Department of Education’s fault? Only
insofar as the Department of Education is responsible for the student loan
scam, or, more accurately, as the Department foolishly trusted accreditors to
do an honest job.
Second, if
anything, college has become more elitist and less accessible to low income
students. The proportion of recent graduates who are from the bottom quartile
of the income distribution has declined since 1970
or 1980. The qualitative gap between the rich highly selective private schools
and state universities has widened—fewer state schools make it near the top in
the US
News rankings, for example.
This is an
interesting perspective, and I don’t see how the Department of Education is
responsible for this (let me state here I’m no apologist for the Department of
Ed, and have no argument for keeping it open), and the article provides no
explanation.
Are the US News
rankings even relevant? The article really needs to address this claim
further—even if there is a decline, is it 30%, or 0.03%?
Third,
there has been a shocking decline in academic standards. Grade inflation is
rampant. The seminal study Academically Adrift by Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa shows that very
little improvement in critical reasoning skills occurs in college. Adult
literacy is falling amongst college graduates. Large proportions of college
graduates do not even know in which half-century the Civil War occurred.
Ideological conformity is increasingly valued over free expression and
empirical inquiry.
The above is all
very true, but I’m hardly seeing the Department’s hand in this. Again, the
student loan scam, which provides money for any
accredited institution that sells “credits” (not education, mind you, but
college credits) is key here. Since the money doesn’t care about academic
standards, those standards are no longer a part of higher education.
Perhaps later
I’ll talk about the “adult literacy is falling amongst college graduates”
because the writing I see from even fairly advanced college students is pretty
frightening at times. My community college used to have a community forum where
faculty could post; so many community college faculty (almost all of whom had
English as a first language, and many with Education-type degrees) were so incapable
of composing a coherent paragraph that we had to shut it down, it was just too
embarrassing. (To be fair, the English
faculty could indeed write well.)
Fourth,
accreditation of colleges, overseen by the Department of Education, is
expensive and ineffective. Few schools are ever sanctioned, much less closed for
shoddy performance…Conflicts of interest are rampant.
This is probably
the kindest, most generous assessment of accreditation as it stands today.
UNC’s 18 year scandal of egregious fraud, with not even the slightest slap on
the wrist from accreditation, is only one example. Across the country, schools
“defraud” accreditation regularly to the point that
racketeering is a fair charge to make against these acts. I put
defraud in quotes because it’s quite obvious that there is no actual defrauding
going on, as accreditation literally doesn’t care, which is why they’ve set
up their system to be all but incapable of detecting fraud.
So yes, the
Department of Education has failed to properly oversee accreditation, which in
turn failed to oversee higher education. Since the latter was never meant to
serve as an overseer (even if accreditors now charge for the service), I’ll
concede the article’s point about the Department of Education being responsible
here.
Fifth, the
federal aid programs and “college for all” propaganda promoted by the
Department have led to a large proportion (probably over 40 percent) of recent
graduates being underemployed, working in jobs traditionally done by high
school graduates. Arum and Roksa observe in their follow-up book Aspiring Adults Adrift that two years after graduation nearly one-fourth of
graduates are still living with their parents.
Did the Department
promote such propaganda? Perhaps…although the student loan scam is what
physically put people into college, both indebting our youth for questionable
coursework, and debasing the value of something that had value due to its
scarcity…both of which contribute to most
college graduates expecting parental support after college. (For what
it’s worth, living with your parents probably should be a pro-family good
thing, but in our culture, doing so is, indeed, a sign of failure, so perhaps 45% of
recent college grads doing so is a good thing?)
Sixth, the
Department is guilty of regulatory excesses and bureaucratic blunders. For
example, the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) imposes a “preponderance of
evidence” standard on colleges in sexual assault cases that violates American
ideals regarding due process and fair treatment of accused.
Note the usual
standard for a crime is “beyond a reasonable doubt.” However, the kangaroo
campus court system is so laughably
biased that admin can get a conviction based on the flimsiest of
charges (note: just the charges are sufficient, evidence is not necessary)…I
just don’t see the Department’s hand here, especially since that looser
standard doesn’t seem to get even fraudulent schools shut down in a timely
manner (or at all).
Regulatory
excesses? Sure, of course…but any school that thought those excesses were too
much could just excuse itself from the system (and all that sweet student loan
loot). This failure means nothing without the student loan scam.
Seventh,
the one arguably useful function of the Department is to provide information to
consumers and taxpayers about college performance. Yet Department bureaucrats
have done very little to give useful information on student learning,
post-graduate success, consumer satisfaction, et cetera.
Again, I must
disagree. For well over a century, higher education did just fine without
providing information to consumers and taxpayers about performance. Reputation
and integrity at the institution were more than sufficient. Most universities
in this country existed long before the Department was established in 1980.
The student loan
scam destroyed that. Who cares about reputation, who needs integrity, when someone
else is paying the bill, willing to pay tuition regardless of how foully run a
school is? Much like public education, law enforcement, and FDA protection from
marijuana, “free” things from government are questionable.
While reasonable
people can disagree how much the Department of Education is responsible for the
previous seven ways things are worse, the fact still remains: higher education
is far worse today than it used to be. Get rid of the Department of Education?
Sure, one can find no way this government institution has done any good since
its inception.
But this is
irrelevant to higher education. We need to get rid of the student loan scam, as
above all other ways we could improve higher education, this is the cheapest by
far, and almost certainly the most effective.
No comments:
Post a Comment