college has been oversold

[Azazello1313]

pretty clear, articulate op-ed

 

Education is the key to the future: You've heard it a million times, and it's not wrong. Educated people have higher wages and lower unemployment rates, and better educated countries grow faster and innovate more than other countries.

 

But going to college is not enough. You also have to study the right subjects. And American students are not studying the fields with the greatest economic potential.

 

Over the past 25 years the total number of students in college has increased by about 50%. But the number of students graduating with degrees in science, technology, engineering and math (the so-called STEM fields) has been flat.

 

Moreover, many of today's STEM graduates are foreign-born and taking their knowledge and skills back to their native countries. Consider computer technology. In 2009 the U.S. graduated 37,994 students with bachelor's degrees in computer and information science. This is not bad, but we graduated more students with computer science degrees 25 years ago.

 

The story is the same in other technology fields. The United States graduated 5,036 chemical engineers in 2009, no more than we did 25 years ago. In mathematics and statistics there were 15,496 graduates in 2009, slightly more than the 15,009 graduates of 1985.

 

Few fields have changed as much in recent years as microbiology, but in 2009 we graduated just 2,480 students with bachelor's degrees in microbiology — about the same number as 25 years ago. Who will solve the problem of antibiotic resistance?

 

If students aren't studying science, technology, engineering and math, what are they studying? In 2009 the U.S. graduated 89,140 students in the visual and performing arts, more than in computer science, math and chemical engineering combined and more than double the number of visual and performing arts graduates in 1985.

 

The story is the same in psychology, which graduates about 95,000 students a year, more than double the number of 25 years ago and far in excess of the number of available jobs.

 

Perhaps most oddly, despite the decline in the number of news media jobs, especially in the print media, the number of students in communication and journalism also has nearly doubled since 1985.

 

There is nothing wrong with the arts, psychology and journalism, but graduates in these fields have lower wages and are less likely to find work in their fields than graduates in science and math.

 

As a result, more than half of all humanities graduates end up in jobs that don't require college degrees. Baggage porters and bellhops don't need college degrees, but in 2008 17.4% of them had at least a bachelor's degree and 45% had some college education. Mail carriers don't need a college education, but in 2008 14% had at least a bachelor's degree and 61% had some college education.

 

Not surprisingly, these graduates don't get much of a financial "bonus" from college. A college graduate in the humanities who finds a job requiring a college degree had median annual earnings in 2009 of $21,000. For those who ended up in jobs not requiring a college degree, the median was just $14,000.

 

Moreover, arts, psychology and journalism graduates are less likely to create the kinds of innovations that drive economic growth.

 

Economic growth is not a magic totem to which all else must bow, but it is one of the main reasons we subsidize higher education.

 

The potential wage gains for college graduates go to the graduates — that's reason enough for students to pursue a college education. We add subsidies to the mix, however, because we believe education has positive spillover benefits that flow to society. One of the biggest of these benefits is the increase in innovation that highly educated workers bring to the economy.

 

As a result, an argument can be made for subsidizing students in fields with potentially large spillovers, such as microbiology, chemical engineering, nuclear physics and computer science. There is little justification for subsidizing majors in the visual arts, psychology and journalism.

 

College has been oversold. It has been oversold to students who end up dropping out or graduating with degrees that don't help them very much in the job market. It also has been oversold to the taxpayers, who foot the bill for subsidies that do nothing to encourage innovation and economic growth.

 

something to chew on at a time when a bunch of humanities majors are out in the streets protesting the fact that they don't have a job, and we have many politicians trying to double-down on taxpayer subsidies for college loans and the like.

[Ursa Majoris]

This article speaks the truth. We don't graduate enough science majors of any kind. Maybe these things are too hard for the lazy or maybe they never get the grounding needed at HS.

 

Whatever the issue is, one way of beefing up the numbers of graduates that then help us advance would be to automatically grant a work visa to any science graduate (or medical graduate) from any country. Right now we boot them out as soon as we've educated them instead of our businesses taking advantage of the education our universities just provided.

[tazinib1]

My son is an engineering major at UCSB. Specifically, Nano technology. There is still hope.

[Chief Dick]

I'm pushing my kids to the trade schools.

[Yukon Cornelius]

I'm pushing my kids to the trade schools.

I am telling mine to move to the hunting cabin and live off the land, do a little logging and what ever else they need to do to stay off the grid.

[Chief Dick]

I am telling mine to move to the hunting cabin and live off the land, do a little logging and what ever else they need to do to stay off the grid.

 

Even better.

[Tford]

I never understood people who simply went to school to go to school.

 

So many of my friends from high school went to University with no direction, no purpose and no end-game desire that their future degree would help them achieve.

 

It sounds like I am soapboxing because I come from the so-called STEM subjects, but from a logical standpoint, the point remains.

 

 

If you don't have any interest in Sociology, Anthropology, Psychology etc. and nothing you plan on doing with the rest of your life has anything to do with those subjects, why are you wasting an ever-increasing amount of money to take those subjects?

[Yukon Cornelius]

I never understood people who simply went to school to go to school.

well it can be a lot of fun and you can live very cheaply....

 

edit to add... that was when school was a heck of a lot cheaper than it is today.

Edited November 2, 2011 by Yukon Cornelius

[Big John]

And still no jobs in my engineering field.

[Jimmy Neutron]

My favorite summary of the American education system: In one hundred years, we've gone from average students learning Latin in high school to colleges teaching remedial English.

[SLAYER]

But without colleges there would be no college football.

[bpwallace49]

My favorite summary of the American education system: In one hundred years, we've gone from average students learning Latin in high school to colleges teaching remedial English.

 

 

That is an awesome summary.

[tazinib1]

But without colleges there would be no college football.

 

Or Girls Gone Wild

[wiegie]

For what it's worth, I usually tell each of my classes about a half-dozen times per semester that if they aren't using college to significantly increase their human capital then they are severely wasting their time and money.

[wiegie]

Or Girls Gone Wild

Or tenured professors

[Cunning Runt]

I am telling mine to move to the hunting cabin and live off the land, do a little logging and what ever else they need to do to stay off the grid.

 

The exact opposite of what I'm telling my kids.

[moneymakers]

The cool thing now a day is to see how much Government cheese that you can receive while breezing through a class or two.

 

Doesnt take much to be considered a full time student and reep the benifits.

 

They cant fill out a job application but they sure know how to fill out a grant/hope/scholarship/disability/assistance/social security form.

Edited November 3, 2011 by moneymakers

[BeeR]

Over the past 25 years the total number of students in college has increased by about 50%. But the number of students graduating with degrees in science, technology, engineering and math (the so-called STEM fields) has been flat.

That's because they're hard. And there's no fluffing your way through them.

 

Also probably playing a part is colleges have less need or desire to coddle/shove kids who don't earn it through the system as HS on down do. Probably not exactly helping as well is how over the last several decades discipline and accountability (in the home and schools) has been shredded while self-entitlement has mushroomed. Small wonder kids growing up in that mindset increasingly shrink from the more difficult and decidedly un-fluffy majors. Some majors in fact I'm amazed even exist. Meanwhile people from generally far more disciplined countries (eg India, China) who don't play the ridiculous touchy-feely games we play are laughing all the way to the bank. Reminds me of a poll done some time ago where (I think this is basically how it went) they asked a bunch of kids what the key to their academic success was; most American kids named a teacher or a parent. The foreign kids said "hard work."

Edited November 3, 2011 by BeeR

[WaterMan]

With America dumbing down, why would colleges accept students at a 70% rate?

 

Maybe this would help America turn away from Jersey Shore and Entertainment Tonight.

 

http://www.martynemko.com/articles/america...-and-you_id1256

[lkirc]

In most fields today, you need to have a degree to even be considered for a position, but a degree is no longer a guarantee to find a position.

 

You have to be better at what you do and you have to work harder than your competition. This can't start after you graduate with a 2.5 GPA from a school that spits out 10,000 other 2.5s every year.

 

Hard work is the bottom line and the only way to prove it to proscpective employers is to have good grades and excel at work while studying. Your resume can't be empty and expect employers to throw out the red carpet for you.

[WaterMan]

In most fields today, you need to have a degree to even be considered for a position, but a degree is no longer a guarantee to find a position.

 

You have to be better at what you do and you have to work harder than your competition. This can't start after you graduate with a 2.5 GPA from a school that spits out 10,000 other 2.5s every year.

 

Hard work is the bottom line and the only way to prove it to proscpective employers is to have good grades and excel at work while studying. Your resume can't be empty and expect employers to throw out the red carpet for you.

 

And while these grads can't find jobs, since no one is hiring them, they are unable to pay back their student loans.

[Yukon Cornelius]

And while these grads can't find jobs, since no one is hiring them, they are unable to pay back their student loans.

which will be the next big bubble to burst.

[Azazello1313]

which will be the next big bubble to burst.

 

au contraire, obama's going to keep it from bursting by blowing harder

[WashingtonD]

It's an opinion piece but it summarizes my view on this discussion:

 

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_19167366

 

The bottom line for me has always been it's rarely what the degree is in, but what you take from the experience and how you choose to apply it.

[lkirc]

And while these grads can't find jobs, since no one is hiring them, they are unable to pay back their student loans.

 

Student loan payments are next to nothing. I know most college graduates don't want to wait tables or shovel taco, but you gotta do what you gotta do.

 

I worked midnights in a concrete plant to pay for school.

 

How much are these poor graduates paying for their cell phone bills every month?

 

We have gone soft and are paying the price......