From the Oracle of DC we have the following proposal:
In today's world, college is not a luxury that only some Americans can afford to enjoy; it is an economic, civic and personal necessity for all Americans. Expanding opportunity for more students to enroll and succeed in college, especially low-income and underrepresented students, is vital to building a strong economy with a thriving middle class and critical to ensuring a strong democracy. That is why .... has set the course for the United States to once again lead the world in college attainment, as we did a generation ago.
College is NOT a necessity for all. Many are not suited for such a process. We need good electricians, plumbers, carpenters. I worked as an electrician while I attended college and it has stuck with me all my life, PhD in EE notwithstanding. I honor good tradespeople, people who work hard and have skills. College should be a place for those suited to its rigor, assuming that they follow something with rigor, and then work their craft as adults. College is not a necessity.
However excellent and highly competitive educational institutions are essential. They must be selective and produce talent that can contribute to the country's wealth. We currently have many such institutions. We do lead the world in attainment, we do not have to worry about the "once again". Just look at the collection of biotech entities around MIT in Kendall Square. But beware, the Washington hordes desire to control that and make it "better" in their eyes.
They then state:
As a key part of this plan, the President directed the U.S. Department of Education to develop and publish a new college ratings system by the 2015-16 school year that would expand college opportunity by recognizing institutions that: excel at enrolling students from all backgrounds, focus on maintaining affordability, and succeed at helping all students graduate.
How can we expect DC to rate MIT? The market rates MIT, that is why Kendall Square is build up. Not because DC delivered a rating system. We most likely will have the same morbidly obese GS 9 prepare the RFP for the rating system with help from some lobbyist whose interests are to increase their sponsors revenue. Oh, and it may be the same GS9 who worked on the ACA.
And what metrics do they propose:
- Percentage of students receiving Pell.
- Expected family contribution (EFC) Gap.
- Family Income Quintiles.
- First-Generation College Status.
- Average Net Price.
- Net Price by Quintile.
- Completion Rates.
- Transfer Rates.
- Labor Market Success, such as Short-term "Substantial Employment" Rates and Long-term Median Earnings.
- Graduate School Attendance.
- Loan Performance Outcomes.
The problem is that many Academic Institutions have been feeding at the trough of the Government and now rely upon it. Then they must comply with these rules. If not they will get their funding cut off. But then what of the many Alumni/Alumnae who truly fund many quality institutions. What of their views. If this system is employed there may be a death spiral down to total mediocrity.
As they say, don't fix it if is ain't broke!
Fundamentally any student, yes the student themselves, should approach college as a means to get a job. There are very few students who are so brilliant that they can approach college for pure knowledge. This approach to college is ones first test of reality. If the student wants to study classic Greek, and the family is now well off, then this is most likely a laudable academic goal but a clueless life directed goal. Someone must tell the student. If a student wants to become a hairdresser, then that is not college. College for almost all is a means to an end. Examine the job postings, then examine those institutions which facilitate entry to those postings and seek out such a path. English majors just do not have a great future. Chemical Engineers are in demand and yes it requires a great deal of work. That should be the lesson.
Posts
