Enter C. Patrick., guest writer to Reclining Society and his take on the abuse of taxpayer supported education funding under the pretense of enhancing the collective society. He is a science professor to a major state college.
Today I was notified that I will receive a 3% salary raise owing to increasing income from tuition my college is receiving. Unlike many universities that are generating funds through tuition increase, my college has chosen to open the academic floodgates and increase total enrollment, nearly doubling the number of students in the past ten years. Although a boon to my place of employment and, more recently, my wallet, I have mixed feelings about this policy. While making higher education available to all is a noble idea, the underlying motivations for increasing enrollment and the effects on society are potentially less than ideal. Masked underneath the mantra of providing education for the masses is a more greed-driven agenda on the part of universities and colleges.
Grabbing a piece of the federal education loan pie has become the major priority among most academic institutions which results in increased personal debt for students. Even further, it creates increased pressure to prevent students from failing so the college may maintain its income. Students that probably should not have been admitted, and subsequently, should not have been allowed to continue, are instead bestowed degrees and pushed out the door to make room for the next customer. This has led to a commoditization of college education, and it is now not uncommon to see minimum wage jobs held by college graduates.
Overall we are sliding into a situation where taxpayer dollars in the form of loans and grants are used to saturate the market with college-educated job hunters whose degree has been devalued. I suppose one could argue that increasing the general education of a population is a good thing; however that’s essentially backing the use of taxpayer money on a very expensive social engineering experiment. While there certainly are methods of addressing this problem, including placing restrictions on the college majors eligible for federal loans, none are politically palatable, and most would probably be perceived as attacks on the ability of everyone to receive equal opportunities at higher education.
Today I was notified that I will receive a 3% salary raise owing to increasing income from tuition my college is receiving. Unlike many universities that are generating funds through tuition increase, my college has chosen to open the academic floodgates and increase total enrollment, nearly doubling the number of students in the past ten years. Although a boon to my place of employment and, more recently, my wallet, I have mixed feelings about this policy. While making higher education available to all is a noble idea, the underlying motivations for increasing enrollment and the effects on society are potentially less than ideal. Masked underneath the mantra of providing education for the masses is a more greed-driven agenda on the part of universities and colleges.
Grabbing a piece of the federal education loan pie has become the major priority among most academic institutions which results in increased personal debt for students. Even further, it creates increased pressure to prevent students from failing so the college may maintain its income. Students that probably should not have been admitted, and subsequently, should not have been allowed to continue, are instead bestowed degrees and pushed out the door to make room for the next customer. This has led to a commoditization of college education, and it is now not uncommon to see minimum wage jobs held by college graduates.
Overall we are sliding into a situation where taxpayer dollars in the form of loans and grants are used to saturate the market with college-educated job hunters whose degree has been devalued. I suppose one could argue that increasing the general education of a population is a good thing; however that’s essentially backing the use of taxpayer money on a very expensive social engineering experiment. While there certainly are methods of addressing this problem, including placing restrictions on the college majors eligible for federal loans, none are politically palatable, and most would probably be perceived as attacks on the ability of everyone to receive equal opportunities at higher education.
I agree with placing restrictions on the majors that will receive federal loans. For the purposes of the government funding of education should be reserved for degrees that will pay back into the community. If a person wants to pursue a degree because it is interesting or touching to themselves or others but does not result in investment returns, then the expense should be on them. It's harsh to say "Don't fund the arts" but when it comes to higher education, but it's not practical.
ReplyDelete