Attending College Does Not Mean You Get A Job
Professors teaching courses in higher education previously known as "hard" verses "soft" degree programs have for many years wearied under the constant marketing by the administration of "soft" degrees lacking in meaningful content or which do not offer graduates access to meaningful work upon completion of their degree.
Even noted colleges and universities have even succumbed to becoming degree mills for the sake of growth and sustaining the associated cost of facilities and capital expenditures, top-heavy high-cost bloated administrations, and expanded campus program not related to academics. At the same time, their effort has been supported by the cry from within an affluent society and eventually by academia that everyone should go to college when only about 20% of future jobs will require a college degree.
A college degree in the former classical liberal sense will indeed improve people lives but not necessary their economic welfare or access to jobs. Although good thinking and reasoning has its advantages especially for entrepreneurs. Except for a limited number of colleges and universities, the former classical liberal education has been abandoned for progressive education focused things like saving snails and sun worshiping. Universities are often more interested in "butts in the seats" to pay the bills. Often, the study of great literature, language, fine art, exceptional communication skills, non-agenda philosophy have been abandoned and replaced by the faculty or department or administrations agendas.
Concluding my rant, there is both a major benefit and a major economic cost to "everyone being expected to go to college." The benefit is that colleges become "holding pens" of those who would have entered the workforce. The result delaying the inevitability of more people being immediately unemployed. However, as noted with "Occupy Wall Street", students and/or graduates now believe they are entitled both to a job but also to having their school bills paid by others. Were they lied to - maybe.
Note that "bogus" education programs not leading to gainful employment also lead student debt. American taxpayers who bear the underlying cost of education through taxes may be forced by the government to forgive debt underwritten by government backed student loans. No wonder the OWS students facing no jobs and large debts would rather "party on dude."
Those attending or already "passed out" of the educational system may need rehab. Sports neanderthals and geeks who can invent things will be paid more than them. Rich kids will inherent and provid menial jobs for them. The hard degree students will relocate and have meaningful jobs. Instead, most graduates will return to the fold to struggle and to hopefully work with those who did not attend college but have our years job seniority on them.
Please, read the following article by Dr. Alex Tabarrok who states, "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." He is indeed correct.
The below article is not abridged. For educational purposes, it is provided in full. If you wish to leave a comment for Dr. Tabarrok, please do so at the referenced link.
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.
--------------
Dr. Tabarrok, research director for the Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif., holds the Bartley J. Madden Chair in Economics at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. His book, "Launching the Innovation Renaissance," was recently published by TED books.
Tags: college, university, students, debt, jobs, no jobs, soft degrees, technology, hard degrees, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!
Posted by Bill Smith at 3:30 PM - Post Link
1 Comments:
Only strong economy end strong energy prograns means you got a JOB !!!!!!
Post a Comment
<< Home