some critical discussion on higher education

[norseamd]

What do you guys think of the situation of higher education right now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...-should-do-before-writing-about-universities/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...fed3de-92c0-11e5-a2d6-f57908580b1f_story.html

1. A response to @dandrezner on universities. He makes some good points but I’m fundamentally with Pearlstein. https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...-should-do-before-writing-about-universities/ …

2. I agree with @dandrezner that what happened in Wisconsin does suggest the danger of using critiques of universities as political weapons.

3. But university bashing will happen regardless, I don’t want academia’s persecution complex to cause them to kick the can yet again.

4. Yes, for-profit colleges are awful and need to go away. They’re corrupt and exploitative and exacerbate every bad thing Pearlstein said.

5. But nonprofit and public colleges are rushing to emulate them. @dandrezner, here’s Todd Leach, Chancellor of UNH: https://youtu.be/ys7o1TR1avI?t=7m30s …

6. Leach talks about practical skills. He uses business speak. His university pushes facilitated communication into public schools.

7. Stress on college as vocational training is counterproductive. We’ve collectively forgotten that general education is *necessary*.

8. Some of the blame, however, lies with scholars who stress the arbitrariness of any particular canon of knowledge over any possible value.

9. The consequence has been that the current canon of general knowledge taught in many colleges is of very dubious value indeed.

10. Drezner cites a paper saying for-profits are responsible for “exploding student debt and default.” But the paper only discusses default.

11. Admin costs haven’t increased hugely since 1995. They did increase hugely in the 20 year period before that. They remain a problem.

12. Drezner: “Instruction responsible for more than half of all spending.” Yet actual instruction is a minority piece of “instruction.”

13. @dandrezner cites @YoniAppelbaum rebutting the numbers on research citations. Those numbers are cooked, but the reality is terrible.

14. Scholarship in entire subfields is poor. Richard Biernacki describes quantitative illiteracy in social science: http://www.waggish.org/2013/is-social-science-a-joke/ …

15. The mavens of disability studies are standing behind a paper “authored” through facilitated communication by Anna Stubblefield’s victim.

16. The field of education is sufficiently dire to produce the SWIFT Center project out of one of its top schools: http://www.swiftschools.org

17. I have read a number of poor humanities dissertations from top universities, suggesting grad students are being pushed out the door.

18. In some humanities, predominance of trends (“digital humanities,” “deconstruction,” “critical theory”) produces evanescent research.

19. And the cliquish echo chamber effect present in many departments has driven out some of the brightest scholars I know.

20. In general, mass production of quality humanities research is an oxymoron. The humanities do not build and cohere as the sciences do.

21. This is a problem not just in the humanities but in non-teleological social sciences like anthropology and sociology.

22. If a field abandons the ideal of Peirce's end to inquiry, trends replace the progress of inquiry. Critique replaces knowledge.

23. The classic humanities dissertation was an outdated practice in 1965. It should not be the sole summit of graduate education.

24. There are some dodgy numbers in the Postrel piece @dandrezner cites, but her stress on the skill of how to learn efficiently is correct.

25. But our colleges do not teach people today how to learn efficiently. We do not even have a collective sense of how to teach that.

26. We hew to the husk of an outdated academic model that’s become infested with business-speak and a carousel of jargon.

27. The quality of individual teachers makes itself felt in spite of these guidelines, not because of them. Teaching is an oral tradition.

28. The bottom line? Pace Drezner, universities, and in particular academics, still need to hunker down and get real. The tide is dropping.

29. As we saw in Wisconsin, when the politicians come for professors, the admins will not protect you. They will sell you out. Be ready.

30. More organizing, fewer conferences. Cross-pollination of ideas. Reduce the importance of publication. Stop exploiting graduate labor.

31. In short: eliminate ossified gatekeeping rituals of academia in favor of productive and educative work. Create better graduates.

https://twitter.com/AuerbachKeller

 

[sm625]

Listen to these guys, about 54 minutes into it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jhU3RZDg70

They sum up what is so wrong with college today.

4. Yes, for-profit colleges are awful and need to go away. They’re corrupt and exploitative and exacerbate every bad thing Pearlstein said.

This is complete nonsense. The problem is government money. Get the damn government out of colleges and this crap will turn around. Either you are rich or you are smart enough to earn a scholoarship. Everyone else can get loans through the private sector if they want to go to college. This gets rids of the bottom feeders who dont really want to be there and are only there because they were able to get a loan from Uncle Cheese.

25. But our colleges do not teach people today how to learn efficiently. We do not even have a collective sense of how to teach that.

This is NOT the job of a college professor! College is for people who already learned how to learn. Those people who jacked off through K-12 simply shouldnt be in college.

 

[Moonbeam]

There are two kinds of minds, those who think they know and those who are open to learning. The former is conservative thinking, the latter is liberal thinking. The only real education is the education that fosters curiosity and the love of learning, the purpose for which we were created. Today the goal of education is to limit the number of candidates in any one field such that those who go for that field will not experience too much competition. It is a process that seeks to drive out learners and reward those who can grind. The more numb to the meaning of life you become, the more successful you will be. Of course, there are always some who what to learn for the sake of learning and can also grind.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

7. Stress on college as vocational training is counterproductive. We’ve collectively forgotten that general education is *necessary*.

lol. Vocational training is inherently used for the purpose of making people productive. "General education" is already (or at least should be) taken care of in K-12. We have basically more students and graduates now than ever before, no one has forgotten the importance of education.

Many of the other points oddly enough seemed to argue against increasing the number of humanities and social science students, so I'm not sure what the overall solution to those various problems is supposed to be. That list reads more like an anecdotal rant by some random old person than a coherent argument.

 

[Ham n' Eggs]

Here is what I want to know.

What changed in the last 20 years with regards to the cost to run a large university?
Did anything actually change there that 1:1 explains the increase in tuition?

 

[Ham n' Eggs]

The article both recommend "less mediocre research". Perhaps that's because they're both from the same news outlet (The Washington Post)?

I can't agree with that one (at least not in the hard sciences). If anything hard-sciences should have research funds increased 10 fold. Nobody can predict (ahead of time) which threads of research are going to be woven into the tapestries of tomorrow's scientific revolutions &/or inventions.

With regards to the "less research" idea from the Washington Post, I can only imagine that the same thing could have been written hundreds of years ago. Nobody could predict hundreds of years ago which threads of research would prove to be the biggest winners, and nobody can do so today. On that point, the Washington Post is wrong (at least for the hard sciences).

I have no opinion as to the social sciences, and I'm not sure if Psychology falls under the soft social sciences or the Hard Sciences, my gut instinct is that is falls somewhere in-between.

 

[OverVolt]

Its way too expensive. As an 18 year old today, I wouldn't go.

 

[bozack]

There are two kinds of minds, those who think they know and those who are open to learning. The former is conservative thinking, the latter is liberal thinking.

biggest bunch of absolute bullshit I have read all year, congrats Moonie in showing just how twisted you are.

 

[JEDIYoda]

biggest bunch of absolute bullshit I have read all year, congrats Moonie in showing just how twisted you are.

Moonie is 110% correct!

 

[Londo_Jowo]

There are two kinds of minds, those who think they know and those who are open to learning. The former is conservative thinking, the latter is liberal thinking.

Based on your posts in here, you are part of the former rather than the later.

 

[Ackmed]

Listen to these guys, about 54 minutes into it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jhU3RZDg70

They sum up what is so wrong with college today.

This is complete nonsense. The problem is government money. Get the damn government out of colleges and this crap will turn around. Either you are rich or you are smart enough to earn a scholarship. Everyone else can get loans through the private sector if they want to go to college. This gets rids of the bottom feeders who dont really want to be there and are only there because they were able to get a loan from Uncle Cheese.

This is NOT the job of a college professor! College is for people who already learned how to learn. Those people who jacked off through K-12 simply shouldnt be in college.

I couldn't agree with you more. What is hilarious and sad to me is that some people are protesting for free college. They don't think they should pay anything for it, while doing nothing to earn it.

The whole college atmosphere is bad anymore it seems. Too many feelings hurt, wanting "safe spaces". Just sad.

 

[Majes]

biggest bunch of absolute bullshit I have read all year, congrats Moonie in showing just how twisted you are.

His post was bait for this type of response. The terms "conservative" and "liberal" can be applied both descriptively and politically. The words are poorly chosen if one is to describe people willing to learn vs. those more close-minded, but they are ideal for inciting people who have been digging through posts filled with conservative/liberal battles.

 

[norseamd]

His post was bait for this type of response. The terms "conservative" and "liberal" can be applied both descriptively and politically. The words are poorly chosen if one is to describe people willing to learn vs. those more close-minded, but they are ideal for inciting people who have been digging through posts filled with conservative/liberal battles.

Did not catch that the first time around reading it.

Well done Moonbeam.

 

[child of wonder]

Allow student loan debt to be excusable in bankruptcy again, teach kids in high school about the risk vs. reward aspect of college, what particular degrees mean in relation to employ-ability and wage earnings, what a degree should cost, that technical or vocational training is also a great choice, and that college is not a guarantee for success so choose wisely.

Since for-profit colleges are no longer guaranteed their exorbitant tuition costs will be paid via Uncle Sam, they'll dry up quickly.

 

[werepossum]

Allow student loan debt to be excusable in bankruptcy again, teach kids in high school about the risk vs. reward aspect of college, what particular degrees mean in relation to employ-ability and wage earnings, what a degree should cost, that technical or vocational training is also a great choice, and that college is not a guarantee for success so choose wisely.

Since for-profit colleges are no longer guaranteed their exorbitant tuition costs will be paid via Uncle Sam, they'll dry up quickly.

Student loans are mostly made BY Uncle Sam. If they are allowed to be dischargeable, then most fluff degree holders and drop-outs will bankrupt, and their loans will be paid by the taxpayer, not the for-profit universities who already have their money.

One way you could make that work is to get the government completely out of the school loan business, so that banks and/or universities took on the financial risk. However, that is not necessarily all good. That smart black kid from the hood might be judged a bad credit risk (i.e. statistically unlikely to graduate) and be unable to go to university even though she is smart and determined, whereas the privileged white kid from the suburbs might be judged as a good risk because his family has money and contacts. I'm not a big fan of the federal government providing school loans, but it does treat everyone equally. (The exceptions of course are the race-based preferences, but those are in place to redress past inequities; that's a bit different from giving preference simply because someone has been fortunate in their birth circumstances.)

 

[Cozarkian]

How about the school makes the loan?

1. School admits student.
2. School provides financial aid award package to student.
3. Government makes loan to the school with repayment deferred until the earlier of four years, graduation, or drop out.
4. School makes loan to student with regulation placed on interest rate mark up. This loan may be discharged in bankruptcy.

Viola! The government is still backing loans but has transferred the risk of loss to the University. The University controls its risk through admissions standards and the degree programs offered. Thus, the University makes money if and only if it succeeds in its mission of educating students in a manner that improves their career prospects.

 

[LegendKiller]

Student loans are mostly made BY Uncle Sam. If they are allowed to be dischargeable, then most fluff degree holders and drop-outs will bankrupt, and their loans will be paid by the taxpayer, not the for-profit universities who already have their money.

One way you could make that work is to get the government completely out of the school loan business, so that banks and/or universities took on the financial risk. However, that is not necessarily all good. That smart black kid from the hood might be judged a bad credit risk (i.e. statistically unlikely to graduate) and be unable to go to university even though she is smart and determined, whereas the privileged white kid from the suburbs might be judged as a good risk because his family has money and contacts. I'm not a big fan of the federal government providing school loans, but it does treat everyone equally. (The exceptions of course are the race-based preferences, but those are in place to redress past inequities; that's a bit different from giving preference simply because someone has been fortunate in their birth circumstances.)

1. Make schools liable for any losses exceeding 5%.

2. First year interest rate is 10%, second year 8%, 3rd and 4th year is 6%. If a degree is completed by 4 or 5 years the loans get a permanent rate of 6%.

3. Loans are underwritten by degrees based upon national average of incomes based upon likely jobs of that degree.

 

[werepossum]

How about the school makes the loan?

1. School admits student.
2. School provides financial aid award package to student.
3. Government makes loan to the school with repayment deferred until the earlier of four years, graduation, or drop out.
4. School makes loan to student with regulation placed on interest rate mark up. This loan may be discharged in bankruptcy.

Viola! The government is still backing loans but has transferred the risk of loss to the University. The University controls its risk through admissions standards and the degree programs offered. Thus, the University makes money if and only if it succeeds in its mission of educating students in a manner that improves their career prospects.

Works for me.

1. Make schools liable for any losses exceeding 5%.

2. First year interest rate is 10%, second year 8%, 3rd and 4th year is 6%. If a degree is completed by 4 or 5 years the loans get a permanent rate of 6%.

3. Loans are underwritten by degrees based upon national average of incomes based upon likely jobs of that degree.

This works for me too. You can charge say $10,000 a year for an engineering curriculum but only $1,000 a year for a media studies curriculum.

I can already hear the screams of racism, sexism, culturism . . .

 

[LegendKiller]

Works for me.


This works for me too. You can charge say $10,000 a year for an engineering curriculum but only $1,000 a year for a media studies curriculum.

I can already hear the screams of racism, sexism, culturism . . .

Don't really give a shit. The degree cost should be based upon what it can earn in the real world. Schools should be on the hook for teaching kids at a reasonable cost and placement on the back end.


We are lending too much money to be paid back. Naturally the government is now saying that the Cohort Default Rate (CDR) is declining. That's because Income Based Repayment / PAYE enrollment is increasing to 20-30% of the $1.1TR portfolio of Direct and FFELP loans.

If 20-30% of your borrowers aren't paying their full amount (they are paying ~25% of expected full repayment), another 20% aren't paying anything due to Deferment and Forbearance and another 10-15% are delinquent on their way to default, your default rate will go down.

 

[werepossum]

Don't really give a shit. The degree cost should be based upon what it can earn in the real world. Schools should be on the hook for teaching kids at a reasonable cost and placement on the back end.


We are lending too much money to be paid back. Naturally the government is now saying that the Cohort Default Rate (CDR) is declining. That's because Income Based Repayment / PAYE enrollment is increasing to 20-30% of the $1.1TR portfolio of Direct and FFELP loans.

If 20-30% of your borrowers aren't paying their full amount (they are paying ~25% of expected full repayment), another 20% aren't paying anything due to Deferment and Forbearance and another 10-15% are delinquent on their way to default, your default rate will go down.

Isn't that how government fixes most problems? Solving the failure is typically hard; redefining it as success is easy.

 

[Moonbeam]

Isn't that how government fixes most problems? Solving the failure is typically hard; redefining it as success is easy.

Actually, what I see is that you and folk like LK are just arrogant self congratulatory parasites that prosper in a world created and made wealthy by the hard work of deeply educated masters of the liberal arts, something called Western Civilization. You are both a couple of pin heads, shallow beyond belief. But I'll do what I can to help you.

 

[werepossum]

Actually, what I see is that you and folk like LK are just arrogant self congratulatory parasites that prosper in a world created and made wealthy by the hard work of deeply educated masters of the liberal arts, something called Western Civilization. You are both a couple of pin heads, shallow beyond belief. But I'll do what I can to help you.

Well, that's just mighty white of you, brother. Do we get some slightly scabby blankets with that help?