College.com ®
Is it worth it?
The average college graduate owes $19,300 after four years. During this time, the average science student has performed hundreds of hours of indentured service for his professors' research. The average premed or prelaw student has done the same at her summer internships.
Four years later: down twenty grand. Hardly a fair system.
College has become increasingly expensive, and increasingly... long. Our service economy requires many students (education, law, medicine, business, finance) to enter graduate school as a prerequisite for employment. We live in a society where eighteen years of full time education are required to become a high school gym teacher.
It seems to me that America's universities are no longer serving the best interests of their students.
A Better Way?
Most students enter college so that they can be prepared to enter the work force. Many study a specific field so that they can work in that field.
With this in mind, I propose a new post-secondary education system: on the job training. Corporations such as General Electric hire recent graduates only from their internship base, as hiring these people is low risk and low cost. Imagine if GE could select talent directly out of high school and provide them with a free education as a member of the real workforce. This would be an incredibly efficient way for young people to learn a field, say physics. Working in GE's jet propulsion lab for four years would be an experience unmatched by today's universities.
This is surely a best case scenario, and of course, GE isn't ready to educate young people on physics 101, but corporations of this size could easily absorb these costs without a lot of the overhead required by a post-modern university (office of minority affairs, etc). In fact, many technical people in such a company could easily act as "professors of practice" and take on a few classes for pay.
The advantages:
Of course, there are some disadvantages. The university can never go away completely, but let's take a step back and consider that many, many people in today's universities are only there so that they will become employable. Middle and lower-middle class students get hit the hardest by college loans, and a plurality of them simply want a job. This would be a good solution for them.
Many would say that the compulsory liberal arts education many students receive is critical for good citizenship. I say that college students are paying customers. If they feel that $30,000 a year is worth it for a complete college experience, then they'll buy. If they'd rather participate in my system, who is to stop them? Further, the politicalization of today's liberal arts courses has become so intense that, in my mind, most people are better off reading the classics on their own time.
If you ask the average college student what he remembers about college, he'll probably say "not much." There is a critical social component to college life. Of course, this would still exist if a company such as GE had a large campus and dormitory system on which thousands of young people lived.
Will It Happen?
The college loan system is so far out of control right now that most colleges don't have to compete on price. But these loans aren't free. They put a serious pressure on our economy, and there is a breaking point for college tuition. Is it $50,000? Is it $60,000? At some point, colleges and other forms of education will begin to compete on price. When this happens, my plan is not too unrealistic.
The average college graduate owes $19,300 after four years. During this time, the average science student has performed hundreds of hours of indentured service for his professors' research. The average premed or prelaw student has done the same at her summer internships.
Four years later: down twenty grand. Hardly a fair system.
College has become increasingly expensive, and increasingly... long. Our service economy requires many students (education, law, medicine, business, finance) to enter graduate school as a prerequisite for employment. We live in a society where eighteen years of full time education are required to become a high school gym teacher.
It seems to me that America's universities are no longer serving the best interests of their students.
A Better Way?
Most students enter college so that they can be prepared to enter the work force. Many study a specific field so that they can work in that field.
With this in mind, I propose a new post-secondary education system: on the job training. Corporations such as General Electric hire recent graduates only from their internship base, as hiring these people is low risk and low cost. Imagine if GE could select talent directly out of high school and provide them with a free education as a member of the real workforce. This would be an incredibly efficient way for young people to learn a field, say physics. Working in GE's jet propulsion lab for four years would be an experience unmatched by today's universities.
This is surely a best case scenario, and of course, GE isn't ready to educate young people on physics 101, but corporations of this size could easily absorb these costs without a lot of the overhead required by a post-modern university (office of minority affairs, etc). In fact, many technical people in such a company could easily act as "professors of practice" and take on a few classes for pay.
The advantages:
- Free education for the student
- Low priced labor for the corporation
- Low end jobs wouldn't be outsourced to India
- Near guaranteed job placement for student
- Real world experience for the student
- Recruiting overhead for new hires down to zero for the employer
- Candidates who can begin adding value immediately for their employers
Of course, there are some disadvantages. The university can never go away completely, but let's take a step back and consider that many, many people in today's universities are only there so that they will become employable. Middle and lower-middle class students get hit the hardest by college loans, and a plurality of them simply want a job. This would be a good solution for them.
Many would say that the compulsory liberal arts education many students receive is critical for good citizenship. I say that college students are paying customers. If they feel that $30,000 a year is worth it for a complete college experience, then they'll buy. If they'd rather participate in my system, who is to stop them? Further, the politicalization of today's liberal arts courses has become so intense that, in my mind, most people are better off reading the classics on their own time.
If you ask the average college student what he remembers about college, he'll probably say "not much." There is a critical social component to college life. Of course, this would still exist if a company such as GE had a large campus and dormitory system on which thousands of young people lived.
Will It Happen?
The college loan system is so far out of control right now that most colleges don't have to compete on price. But these loans aren't free. They put a serious pressure on our economy, and there is a breaking point for college tuition. Is it $50,000? Is it $60,000? At some point, colleges and other forms of education will begin to compete on price. When this happens, my plan is not too unrealistic.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home