community colleges

...now browsing by tag

 
 

Post-Secondary Education: The Cornerstone of the High-Skill, High-Wage Economy

Sunday, September 30th, 2012

Employment prospects and salary levels improve dramatically as education levels increase. These combine to result in big gains in lifetime earnings at each progressive level of the education ladder. College grads (and especially advanced degree holders) have much higher earnings and suffer far less unemployment than do high-school graduates (not to speak of those without a high school degree. Lifetime earnings of high school graduates average about $973,000 in 2009 dollars, compared with about $1.7 million for those with associate degrees, $2.3 million for those with bachelors and $3.6 million for those with professional degrees.

Moreover, these differences are getting wider. Pay for college graduates has risen by 15.7% (adjusted for inflation) over the past 32 years, compared with an average decline of 25.7% for those workers without college degrees. And this does not even begin to account for non-economic advantages held by college graduates, including lower divorce rates, fewer single-parent families and longer life expectancies.

Higher-Education: High-Skill Holy Grail?

At first glance, given the employment, income and other disparities, it may appear that any student, with a real choice in the matter, should get at least a baccalaureate degree, and ideally, a Masters, PhD or Professional degree. In addition to the benefits discussed above, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS’) Employment Projections—2010-20 project projects that occupations in which a master’s degree or higher is typically required, are expected to grow at the fastest rate of any other education category (21.7% for masters and 19.9% for doctoral or professional degrees—especially in healthcare-related professions).

On the other hand, however, the report projects that only 3 of the 30 occupations that BLS expects to produce the largest number of job openings by 2020 are expected to require a bachelor’s degree or higher—teachers, college professors and accountants. But even these careers will face big challenges. Teacher and college hiring are both suffering from big government funding cuts that threaten to greatly reduce both the pay and the fabled job security these jobs offer. Accountants, meanwhile, are subject to the same type of offshoring pressures as a number of other high-skill jobs. And then there is the increasingly critical issue of the costs (both explicit and implicit opportunity costs) of attending college, the burden of college debt and the increasingly asked question as to whether the “return” from a college education is worth the “investment.”

This incredibly complex question entails much more than an ROI analysis. It is also highly situational, depending on factors including the student’s grades, motivation, objectives and family situation. Even if you focus exclusively on employability and salary, the answer varies greatly by factors including:

  • Which school on is talking about, Harvard or the proverbial Podunk State?
  • Cost of tuition—is it a private or public school, what type of financial aid is available, can you ameliorate expenses such as by living at home or working part time?
  • The breadth and depth of one’s personal network, which is still one of the most important determinants as to whether and what type of job one can get.

Most important, however, is the field of study. As shown in the BLS Employment Projections report, philosophy, anthropology, zoology, art history and humanities graduates are the least likely to find jobs. Those majoring in engineering, math, biology, computer science, accounting and economics are not only far more likely to find jobs, they are also more likely to get jobs in their field and earn higher salaries.

A more dated BLS report looked specifically at starting salaries for a range of liberal arts majors. Overall, liberal arts graduates of highly selective Ivy League and other Tier One schools often have reasonable success in finding jobs, almost regardless of their major—even among hedge funds and management consulting firms. Often, 80% or more of such graduates either go on to graduate school or get jobs at, or soon after, graduation.

The same is sometimes true of particularly attractive graduates of less selective programs. Morgan Stanley, for example, may obtain 25-30% of its undergraduate hires out of liberal arts programs, and then provide them with more functional training through online courses and training programs.

Community Colleges: The Other Higher Education

Higher education does not necessarily mean a four-year degree. Community colleges, often viewed as something of a poor stepchild of the university, play critical roles in educating many first-generation students who would not otherwise have a chance for a college education and play a key role as a low-cost “feeder system” for four-year schools. Just as importantly, they are often far-more attuned to the skills requirements of local businesses. Some of these schools design classes, certification programs and even associate degree programs in conjunction with, and serve as training arms for these businesses.

The single fastest projected employment growth (in terms of numbers) is for Registered Nurses. In fact, these jobs, plus those of 5 of the 30 fastest growing (in percentage terms) jobs in the country—all of which are also in healthcare—all require Associate Degrees (rather than Bachelors or advanced degrees) as their minimum educational requirements. Community colleges are also instrumental in preparing the next lower skill (and often wage) workers—those that must take certification courses and pass exams as either a formal or informal qualification for jobs.

Even many above-average paying jobs that don’t require a formal post-secondary degree of certificate often require a less formal education program, such as an apprenticeship program. In fact, occupations that require apprenticeships are expected to be the fastest growing of all jobs that require some form of on-the-job training. Some of these—especially those that require demonstrated technical competence—are among the highest paid and most difficult to fill positions in today’s job market. They are likely to occupy the same position in tomorrow’s job market..

The Future of Community Colleges

Thursday, August 25th, 2011

Online College Courses has just released its list of Ten Predictions for the Future of Community Colleges.

Although the list certainly does discuss (correctly) the importance of online education, it goes far beyond the group’s primary focus to emphasize a number of other critical changes that, as we had discussed in our 2010 series on the future of community colleges.

The list includes, but is not limited to the:

  • The growing need for community colleges as an alternative to the exploding cost of attaining four-year degrees;
  • Changes that will be required to meet the needs of rapidly growing numbers of non-traditional students;
  • Increased coordination with local businesses;
  • Growing focus on identifying and preparing students for high-demand jobs, regardless of whether or not these jobs require degrees;

The list is well worth checking out.

Funding the Community College Solution

Sunday, September 19th, 2010

Okay, perhaps use of the term “Solution” is a vast exaggeration. But two things are clear. First, as described in my August 8 blog, The Community College Contribution, community colleges play a vital, probably irreplaceable role in our society and our communities. They give millions of people, particularly lower-income minorities and immigrants, unprecedented opportunities to climb the socio-economic ladder and provide many of the office workers required to man administrative and supervisory ranks, the health-care workers required to ensure broad and economical delivery and the manufacturing workers needed to manage today’s computer-controlled processes.

Second, as I discussed in my August 22 blog, The Community College Crisis, this system is in a state of crisis. Many of these challenges are attributable to the tremendous expectations we have of the system and burdens we place on it to address the limitations of the country’s secondary education system. These pressures are being exacerbated by the Great Recession and especially by the huge cutbacks in government funding of these schools.

The county, as President Obama explained in July 2009, has no choice. The community college has suffered through “decades of federal neglect” where “community colleges are treated like an afterthought—if they’re thought of at all.” We MUST find a way of addressing these challenges—and of paying for them.

Better Colleges Require More Money

The bad news is that nobody really knows how to fix our community college system. The good news is, there is no shortage of ideas. Recommendations as to how to address these challenges and help community colleges deliver on their true potential come from a range of sources and cover virtually every aspect of these institutions’ missions.

Some, such as the American Association of Community Colleges and especially the Community College Research Center, focus exclusively on and provide detailed research on all aspects of the colleges’ missions. Others, including the American Enterprise Institute, the Brookings Institution and the Kaufman Foundation address a broad range of policy-based issues, but each have designated education research focuses.

These, along with a wide range of other research organizations, universities, government bodies and NGOs have published numerous studies with specific recommendations for helping community colleges improve governance and better address one or more of their five core missions:

  1. Transfer Education, to educate students who plan to transfer to a four-year institution to pursue a BS/BA degree;
  2. Career Education, to prepare Associate Degree graduates to directly enter the workforce;
  3. Developmental Education, to provide remedial education for high school graduates who are not academically ready to enroll in college-level courses;
  4. Industry Training, which is contracted for by companies to provide training for specific jobs; and, to a lesser extent
  5. Continuing Education, which typically consists of non-credit courses for personal development and interest.

Although recommendations differ for each of these areas, there tend to be common treads across virtually all. Many recommendations, for example, entail some combination of:

  • Better and more systematically integrating academic and technical curricula in conjunction with apprenticeship programs that provide real world experience (as pioneered by so-called “career academies”;
  • Increasing and improving counseling programs to improve career planning and help students select courses that are most appropriate for their goals. (This, however, assumes that classes are available, which is becoming increasingly rare.)
  • Greatly expanding the use of IT tools to improve pedagogy and learning outcomes, engage students through multimedia and educational games, facilitate distance learning and give students much greater flexibility in when and where they learn;
  • Creating specific goals and success metrics and continually measuring progress toward achieving these goals; and
  • Increasing funding and increasingly allocating these funds on the basis of success in achieving and making progress toward defined, measurable objectives.

Money is becoming increasingly problematic. As discussed in my last blog, The Community College Crisis, state and local governments—which typically account for about 60% of community college funding—are slashing public school funding and contributions (which account for less than 5%) are also generally falling. This leaves three funding sources.

  1. Tuition. While rising, tuition account for only 20% of school budgets. Moreover, increases are constrained by the need to keep community colleges accessible to lower income students;
  2. Business funding of specialized courses. Given that business contracts currently account for less than 10% of community college revenues, it will be difficult to grow contracts fast enough to make a meaningful dent in funding shortfalls. Even so, private sector partnerships can yield an additional, even greater benefit, as by allowing colleges to continually track emerging business needs and adapt their programs to ahead of these needs; and
  3. The federal government. The federal government currently accounts for only 10% of community college funding and provides  less money per student than it gives to public four-year schools and in some cases, even for-profit colleges. Surprisingly, however, the feds are stepping up to the plate.

With a Little Help from Government Friends

There is no question that the federal government has short-changed the nation’s community colleges over the last several decades. For example, it allocates only 10% of its total post-secondary education funding budget to community colleges. This is despite the fact that these schools enroll 35% of all post-secondary students. Moreover, since many of these funds are based primarily on enrollment, without regard to whether their students earn degrees or get good jobs, this funding often skews community colleges’ incentives toward inputs and processes, rather than outcomes, like student success. A February 2009 Brookings study called on the federal government to address these deficiencies by instituting four primary reforms:

  1. Institute a new focus on national goals guided by an accountability system that tracks and reports outcomes, such as completion of a minimum number of credits, earning a degree, and landing a good-paying job;
  2. Double federal funding from $6 billion to $12 billion (from about 20% to 30% of their total budgets) to help community colleges achieve these goals and fund much needed upgrades to their infrastructure, technology, and faculties.
  3. Reformulate the basis on which federal funds are awarded so that, over time, the majority of funds will be based not on the basis of enrollment, but on the colleges’ performance on the above goals; and
  4. Stimulate greater innovation in community college policies and practices to enhance educational quality.

The federal government seems to have gotten the message. In July 2009, President Obama highlighted his commitment to addressing these needs by announcing his Community College Initiative. The $12 billion plan is intended to improve educational facilities, increase and improve the utilization of technology and boost graduation rates—producing 5 million more community college grads by 2020. This is big money, considering that the feds have traditionally provided community colleges with only $2 billion in direct support per year—about one-tenth what it spends on public four-year schools.

Although the plan will eliminate the role (and an estimated $9 billion in costs) of private banks in managing the federal student loan program, it will dramatically increase the role of the private sector in other ways, as by encouraging them to help colleges improve remedial-education and counseling programs, and develop online curricula. The proposal would also increase funding of, reduce barriers to qualifying for and increase student access to Pell grants. Congress, meanwhile, is considering legislation that could pump an additional $500 million into the creation of open, online courses.

Moreover, as I mention in my previous blog, community colleges are also likely to benefit from new Department of Education rules that will free up additional aid dollars by cutting aid to a number of for-profit schools.

The community college crisis is also attracting attention and help from other sources. Although charitable contributions are generally falling along with the economy, a growing number of charitable foundations recognize and are seeking to at least partially address community college shortfalls. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, in particular, has pledged up to $110 million (of its $3 billion overall education fund) to community colleges and has recently earmarked $12.9 million to organizations that that are having success in improving community college graduation rates, developing tools to facilitate Web 2.0-based faculty collaboration and creating new IT-based learning tools. And this is in addition to the Foundation’s participation in a twelve-foundation group that has committed $500 million to improving learning outcomes—largely through the use of IT-based tools—across all types of educational institutions. Hopefully, such investments, combined with foundations’ growing focus on quantifiable results, will impose some of the discipline that community colleges will need to succeed in a world that will be characterized by tighter and tighter budgets.

The Community College Crisis

Sunday, August 22nd, 2010

As I discussed in my last blog (“The Community College Contribution”), the community college system plays a number of critical roles in the U.S. higher-education system, not to speak of the roles these colleges play in their communities and the broader U.S. society. The Great Recession has greatly expanded these roles and has prompted phenomenal growth in the number of applications to, and enrollment in these colleges.

The problem is that the rapidly expanding role of the system, combined with the need to accommodate growing numbers of students, has exposed a number of serious systemic cracks. Piling on on the impact and the financial cuts attributable to the recession has now brought the entire system to the brink of crisis.

Systemic Challenges

The community college system is already becoming a victim of its own success. Between 1998 and 2008, the number of students enrolled in the community college system exploded by 225%, far outpacing growth at four-year universities, whose enrollments grew 1.65 times. But while the number of students surged, the number of community colleges expanded by only about 16% (to a total of 1,045), far more slowly than the number of four-year schools and private, for-profit two-year schools (often called junior colleges). The results, most community colleges are terribly overcrowded.

Operating budgets are also growing more slowly. Public community colleges, for example, count on tuitions for only about 20% of total funding and sources including gifts and contracts with local businesses roughly another 10%. Governments account for the vast majority, with states contributing about 40%, localities about 20% and federal another 10%. The problem is that state and local government funding has been growing at less than the rate of inflation and has fallen way behind the growth in the number of students graduating from high schools and the percentage of high school graduates who are going to college.

Community colleges, meanwhile, capture far less than their fair share of federal government funding. While these schools enroll about 35% of all post-secondary students, they capture only about 20% of total federal tertiary education funding including 9% of federal campus-based aid, 14% of academic competitiveness grants and 30% in Pell Grants.

Some of this shortfall, however, is at least attributable to the colleges themselves. Consider Pell grants. Publicly-funded community colleges typically address the same market and recruit from the same applicant pool as private, for-profit two-year schools. But while these for-profit colleges (including those owned by Apollo Group, Career Education Corporation and ITT Technical Institute) enroll only 7.7% of total post-secondary students, they have become much more effective at qualifying for federal education aid— capturing almost 25% of all federal aid, with some counting on this aid for 90% of their total revenues.

These for-profit colleges have been particularly effective in winning Pell Grants, capturing more than $10 billion—more than all community colleges combined. Why? Numerous federal investigators and journalists have been asking the same questions. Suppositions include the ability of these high-priced, typically profitable schools to afford and incent recruiters to sign large numbers of students and train financial aid officers to help students qualify for federal grants and loans. But whatever the reasons, the Department of Education has just issued new rules that will dramatically cut aid to those schools whose graduates do not earn enough to repay their loans.

Limited funding, however, is only part of the explanation for community colleges’ traditionally poor financial position. While community colleges certainly get less funding than other types of higher-education institutions, they also bear disproportionately higher costs. For example, they are forced to spend an estimated $2 billion per year to teach remedial skills (especially in math, English and writing) that were not learned in high school. This remediation burden falls particularly heavily on community colleges. According to the U.S. Department of Education, about one-third of all the nation’s first-year college students require at least one remedial course—a figure that rises to 42% for two-year schools. Some states want them to go even further, taking over all GED education plus the remedial education traditionally offered by public four-year schools.

The results: Community colleges are being forced to pack more students into each class, reduce time in expensive facilities such as labs and cut back on “frills”, such as education and career counselors (see below). This, combined with their state-mandated open admission policies, results in more dropouts than graduates.

True, all American colleges and universities (except for the most competitive), have a dropout problem. An OECD study, for example, shows that while the U.S. sends the highest percentage of high school graduates to college of all member countries, it has the second lowest (next to Italy) completion rate. Publicly-funded community colleges perform worse than any other type of school. A 2009 St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank study, for example, found that only 35% of community college students complete one semester of study and that fewer than 50% end up completing any type of degree. Those who do go on to four-year schools are 36% less likely to complete their degree than are those students who started at a four-year college.

The worst part—this was all before the Great Recession.

Burden of the Recession

While the situation was bad before, it is much worse now. All state college systems face huge budget cuts, but California has become ground zero. Although all forms of public education are being decimated in California, public universities face the brunt of the cuts. The University of California and the California State University systems now face budget shortfalls totaling $940 million. They are being forced to slash salaries, freeze hiring and limit purchases to essential items. Worse still, tuition rates are soaring (up 32%), 200,000 students will lose Cal Grant tuition assistance (before the entire program is eliminated in 2011), and state universities are being forced to stop accepting applications for the 2010 spring term and cut total system-wide enrollment by 40,000 students over the next year. California community colleges alone had to turn away 140,000 prospective students this year.

The situation is even worse for the state’s 100+ public community colleges. Record percentage of high-school graduates, facing bleak employment prospects, have decided to attend college. Meanwhile, laid off employees, fearing that “their jobs are not coming back”, are looking to community colleges to help prepare for new careers. And then there are the hundreds of thousands of students who are being turned away from the state university systems. As if this weren’t bad enough, the state is cutting $630 million in funding for community colleges—about 9% of system’s total budget.

Although all California community colleges are in similar straits, City College of San Francisco has become something of a poster child for the crisis. The school which lost $13.6 million in state financing this academic year, has slashed spending and is trying to raise money in any way it can. It has held garage sales and flea markets, installed donation boxes in bookstores and cafeterias. It is now soliciting contributions from individuals—promising to name a class for any individual or company that pledges $6,000.

This creativity, however, has not been enough to stave off reality. It was forced to cancel its summer session and cut more than 900 classes over the year. Those students who can afford higher tuitions and lower subsidies must now struggle to get the courses required to meet major requirements, graduate or transfer to a university. One thousand six hundred and fifty-five of those students who tried to register in fall 2009 did not get into any classes at all, up from 635 in fall 2005. And when they try to ask a counselor for help, they learn that more than 10,000 counseling hours have been cut.

As explained by Michael Kirst, professor emeritus of education at Stanford and past president of the California State Board of Education, “The longer students cannot take the classes they want or need, the less likely it is that they will complete the program they want. They run out of money. They run out of time. They just give up at some point.”

How bad is this situation? Search Google for the term “community college crisis” and the first five articles focus on California. But, that’s California. What about the rest of the country. First, in terms of community colleges, one can almost say that California IS the country. More than one-quarter of all U.S. community college students are in California.

Facetiousness aside, the California case may be the highest profile and the most extreme. It is, however, far from unique. Virtually all states are facing huge financial shortfalls and most are making particularly large cuts in public education—especially higher education. And many experts expect the state fiscal crisis to worsen in 2011. Moreover, the current fiscal crisis only served to make a dreadful situation even worse. As discussed , the nation’s community college problems run much deeper than budgets.

Although the U.S. consistently dominates the ranks of the world’s best universities, its overall higher education accomplishments are far less impressive. For example, according to the OECD, although the U.S. already spends more than twice the share of GDP on higher education than does the European Union, it is typically in the middle of the pack (or lower) in areas such as International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) qualifications, science and math education and graduation rates.

So, what’s the answer? The solutions are even more complex than the problem. Although nobody knows all the answers, I will discuss some of the proposed solutions—and the ways of paying for them—in my next blog.

The Community College Contribution

Sunday, August 8th, 2010

As I discussed in my June 25 blog (Occupational Opportunities for the Next Decade), the Bureau of Labor Statistics 2010 Occupational Outlook Handbook shows that 46 million jobs (30% of those in the U.S.) will soon require more than a high school education, but less than a four-year bachelor’s degree. The nation’s 1,200 community colleges are—and will continue to be—the primary source of this education as demand for individuals with two-year technical degrees grows faster than that for those with a full university degree.

These institutions, which enroll a total of 11.8 million, or 43% of the country’s undergraduate students, play five critical, but very different roles in our educational system, providing:

  • Transfer Education, for students that will transfer to a four-year institution to pursue a BS/BA degree;
  • Career Education, for those that will graduate with an Associate Degree and directly enter the workforce;
  • Developmental Education, remedial education for high school graduates who are not academically ready to enroll in college-level courses;
  • Continuing Education, which entails non-credit courses for personal development and interest; and
  • Industry Training, which is contracted for by companies to provide training for specific jobs.

Of the 930,000 students who completed formal courses of community college study in 2009, 65% graduated with Associate Degrees (which typically require the equivalent of roughly two years of full-time study). The other 35% end up with certificates, such as a GED (General Educational Development) high school equivalency or Industry training certificate.

Engines of Social Mobility

Community colleges, however, do much more than confer degrees or certificates. They are also one of nation’s the most effective enablers of social mobility. community colleges, for example, have open admission policies, offering degree-track admission to anyone with a high school diploma or equivalent, regardless of grades. And, according to data from the American Association of Community Colleges, tuition at public community colleges costs an average of 64% less ($2,544) than those for public four-year colleges and 1/10th to 1/20th the cost of many private four-year schools.

They also cater to disproportionately higher percentages of ethnic minorities (40% of total enrollment) and first-generation college students in their families (42%). And since they are so geographically widespread, with campuses or extension centers within an hour’s drive of more than half of the nation’s population, they provide a critical source of education and vocational training to commuters, those who live in rural areas and those who must work part-time. In fact, according to AACC, 60% of all community college students are enrolled part-time (with 89% of these working either full or part time) and of those who do attend on a full-time basis, 80% work (with more than a quarter of these working full time).

Those students who attend community colleges—and especially those who graduate—are generally rewarded with higher-paying and more secure jobs than those who with only a high school diploma. Bureau of Labor Statistics figures, for example, show that those students who attend, but did not receive an Associates’ degree from a community college, typically earn 13% more than those with just a high school diploma. Those who complete a degree earn 21% more. Both are also correspondingly less likely to be unemployed. Those who take, and ideally earn certificates and degrees in technically-oriented math and science courses, earn significant premiums (about 14 percent for men and 29 percent for women) over those in less technical fields.

Local Economic Development Engines

These schools also play important roles in helping their communities develop their economies. They do this by upgrading the skills of their community’s labor force, both in providing remedial and vocational training to “traditional” students who have just recently graduated from high school, and especially to older, non-traditional students. These include those who return to school to freshen or sharpen existing skills, homemakers or welfare recipients who are preparing to enter the labor force, immigrants looking to improve their language skills and displaced or dislocated workers who are seeking to retrain for a new occupation that offers better employment prospects.

Since many vocational graduates tend to seek jobs in their own communities, most of these schools tend to be highly attuned to the needs of local businesses, tailoring courses and curricula to the needs of local industries and often partnering with specific companies to:

  • Provide customized or contract job training, as where they develop programs that are tailored to the needs of specific companies; or
  • Develop cooperative education programs that combine classroom learning and practical (typically paid) on-the-job experience.

These colleges can also play much more proactive roles, as by partnering with state and local governments to provide business development services. They may partner with the state to create and operate entrepreneurial training centers or government-funded small business development centers (SBDCs) or participate in the creation of regional economic development plans. Colleges also actively partner with government agencies and Chambers of Commerce to attract corporations to build or expand facilities in their communities, by serving as a third-party training arm to teach local citizens the skills required by these new employers.

They may also play much more defensive roles, as by contracting with cities and states to retrain plant-closing victims for new jobs in totally different fields. The State of Michigan, for example, provides tuition assistance to community colleges that retrain displaced auto workers for careers in other industries—especially health-care.

On-Ramps to Higher Education

Community colleges also play another critical role in society: that of a feeder system to universities. A large percentage of students enter community colleges with the express intention of transferring to four-year universities and the recession is prompting growing numbers of four-year students to temporarily “drop down” to community colleges to cut costs.

Overall, about 29% of all community college students end up transferring to four-year universities and 17% of all bachelor degree holders had previously earned associate degrees. These transfer and “step-up” processes are facilitated by the existence of “articulation agreements” that specify which courses credits will and will not transfer to four-year schools. With careful planning, students can transfer most, if not all their credits.

The result is millions of low-income, minority and late bloomer high school graduates who would not have been able to afford to attend or get accepted by four-year universities, end up with four-year, and in some cases, graduate or professional degrees. And with university costs doubling over the last decade and rising at twice the rate of those for health care (see my July 11 blog “Is College Still the Best Road to the American Dream?”), the role of community colleges as a first-step to a four-year degree appears likely to increase.

Too Much of a Good Thing?

Given the value community colleges provide, their popularity should come as no surprise. The growing demand for educated workers, combined with the rapidly growing cost of a four-year university education has led enrollment in these colleges to expand at about twice the rate as for four-year universities. Now, the recession is prompting more high-school graduates to enroll in college as a means of deferring entry into the job market, forcing more displaced workers to return to school to learn new skills, and enticing growing numbers university students to “drop down” from four-year to two-year programs as a way of reducing expenses and the long-term burden of college debt.

Total enrollment has exploded from 6.8 million to 8 million between 2006 and 2009 and applications for 2010 are likely to surpass those in 2009 to reach a new record. Unfortunately, this may be too much of a good thing. Unless something dramatic is done, the rapid growth of community colleges may well contain the seeds of the system’s destruction.

Is College Still the Best Road to the American Dream?

Sunday, July 11th, 2010

My June 27 blog examined some of the high-level findings of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) recently released Occupational Outlook Handbook. Among the primary findings—university graduates have much better employment prospects, earn significantly higher weekly and lifetime earnings and suffer much lower unemployment rates than those with without these degrees.

The blog ended with the question: Given the economic advantages of higher education, why would anyone not get a college, or even graduate degree? This blog briefly reviews some of the reasons.

It is sad do say, but some people are simply not up to higher education. A good portion of those that are, are either too turned off by their experiences in primary and secondary schools, or have not received the type of education that will allow them to continue. This is prompting many educators and foundations, including the Gates Foundation, to look to community colleges as the lynchpin to improving higher education.

Although I will specifically discuss community colleges in future blogs, let’s focus on some of the reasons people do not, cannot or should not go to four-year universities.

The Cost Equation

One of the first and most frequently cited arguments against universities is the cost. According to BLS, college tuition and fees have soared 92% since 2000—almost double the pace of healthcare. And the rate of increase has accelerated thanks to the Great Recession, as the value of university endowments and government funding has plummeted. Tuition at some private universities now exceed $40,000 annually and even some state universities now charge more than $10,000. By the time you add in room and board, costs can exceed $50,000 per year for private universities and $20,000 for public universities. And this does not even begin to account for the opportunity costs associated with going to college—much less graduate school—of 4-10 years of earnings that students forgo while in school.

These costs are making it all but impossible for lower-income families to foot the bill, unless their children qualify for very generous scholarships or find particularly remunerative part-time and summer jobs.

Without even getting into the ways in which escalating education costs are likely to exacerbate already high levels of income inequality, these costs are throwing many students into debt, before they even get a chance to begin their careers. Statistics compiled by Credit.com show that students graduate from college with an average of $20,000 in student loan debt, plus an additional $4,100 in credit card debt. And then there’s graduate school. According to the AMA, 87% of medical students graduate carrying educational loans and graduate with an average of $156,456 of debt.

Starting out with high levels of debt is bad enough. But if these students have the misfortune of graduating into a deep recession, they may not be able to find a job that will allow them to pay off the debt. Or if they do find a job, it is likely to be a minimum wage position that has little to do with their chosen field, and may make it difficult to ever get onto a true career ladder. Even the lucky graduates, who do get jobs in their field, often must settle for lower-level positions and lower salaries. A study by Yale of Management economist Lisa Kahn, for example, found that new graduates who join a company during a recession (1981 for her study) not only start at lower wages, but generally continue to earn lower wages and find it difficult to compete with younger, more recent graduates when normal hiring patterns resume.

Education Quality Compromises

That is for those who graduate. The sad fact, according to Harvard economists Claudia Goldin and Lawrence Katz, is that while the U.S. sends a higher percentage of high school graduates to college than any other OECD country, it is second to last—ahead of only Italy—in graduating these students. About half of all students who enroll in four-year universities—and two-thirds of those in two-year colleges—do not graduate at all. They forego income, pay tuition and room and board for 1, 2 or 3 years and never earn a degree. And, according to the William Bowen and Michael MacPhearson book, Crossing the Finish Line, this drop-out rate is even higher for lower-income students. And since college drop-outs typically earn 30% less ($33,000 compared with $47,000) than do grads, they are unlikely to recover much of their investment.

And this does not even consider one of the central premises of the Bowen/MacPhearson book, that many colleges—and especially many of those attended by highly-qualified lower-income students—do a better job in “producing dropouts” than in educating and graduating students. Education quality—not to speak of availability—is likely to further decline as a result of the state funding cuts, college endowment losses and alumni contribution shortfalls engendered by the recession.

University of California budget cuts, for example, are forcing schools to increase tuition by 32%, lay off and cut salary of faculty and staff, cut programs and classes, increase class sizes. California State University, meanwhile, is being forced to stop accepting applications for the 2010 spring term and cut total system-wide enrollment by 40,000 students over the next year. Students who are already enrolled are finding it increasingly difficult to get into oversubscribed classes that are required to meet graduation and major requirements.

Some prospective students, especially those from lower-income families, are being foreclosed from higher education altogether. Those can afford the cost will find it more difficult to get required classes and may have to postpone graduation. Meanwhile, the limited availability of jobs is prompting many who would not otherwise seek higher education to go back to school. Dropout rates can be expected to increase over the next few years and more students will graduate with more debt.

The Education-Job Market Disconnect

What is a new high-school or college graduate to do? With jobs scarce—especially for young adults—graduates are increasingly choosing to go back to school. Schools, however, are cutting back on the number of students they can accept, increasing tuitions and reducing course offerings.

A relative handful of students will get into (and be able to pay for) the best schools, major in the fields most likely to qualify them for attractive, well-paying jobs and graduate into a robust economy that will value and pay for their skills. The vast majority, however, face less attractive options. They can:

  • Skip higher education and possibly relegate themselves to a life of less desirable, low-paying, low-security jobs; or
  • Go to school (if they can afford it), accumulate more debt and risk graduating into a still slow economy.

Luckily there are more attractive alternatives to each of these fates:

  • A number rapidly growing fields, in industries including health care and higher education, still offer attractive, relatively well-paying jobs that do not require bachelor degrees (some registered nurse positions, insurance agents, police, medical assistants, etc.) or to a lesser extent, even associate degrees (cooks, welders, truck drivers, carpenters, etc.). In fact, of the 30 jobs projected to grow at the fastest rate, only 7 typically require a four-year degree;
  • Those who do go to college or graduate school can pursue fields of study, especially in finance, accounting and STEM-related disciplines (science, technology, engineering, math) that lead to jobs which companies currently have trouble filling and are expected to produce large numbers of well-paying jobs in the future (physicians, pharmacists, post-secondary teachers, software engineers, accountants, etc.).

My next blog post will drill down into findings for some of these bachelor-and-above-level jobs, examining categories and specific jobs which offer the best employment opportunities, the highest earnings potential and ideally, good opportunities for intellectual and psychic fulfillment.