Comment by tokenadult | Hacker News Reader

Comment by tokenadult | Hacker News Reader

From the article kindly submitted here:

"'We have a more informed class of college consumers,' said Bonnie Snyder, founder of Kerrigan College Planning in Lancaster, Pa. 'Everyone today knows someone who went to college and ended up with a career that didn't justify the cost. They see college as a more risky investment.'"

Yep. More and more of us know more and more examples of college graduates who live in their parents' basements because they can't support themselves with their college diploma. It's time to be more discerning consumers of higher education.

Colleges try to confuse the issue of their value with imaginary list prices subject to discounts ("scholarships") that mislead about what a college is actually worth. Here's an interesting link about how colleges are advised to set their prices by consulting firms, a link I learned about from a Harvard-trained economist and policy analyst:

http://www.maguireassoc.com/services-challenges/optimize-net...

High prices plus liberal aid is a great racket. The combination lets a college look both extra valuable ("such high tuition!") and extra generous ("so much aid!"). All the while, they're actually engaging in profit-maximizing price-discrimination and government-subsidy-farming. More on how this may not be sustainable for higher education here:

http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2012/11/26/the-net-p...

Colleges try to confuse the issue of their value with imaginary list prices subject to discounts ("scholarships")

The lack of transparency in the discounting process is deplorable. I ended up trying law study via an online correspondence school - a terrible idea, with hindsight, due to the social isolation - because the B&M schools' scholarship policy seemed so arbitrary and opaque that I was unwilling to take the risk of becoming liable for $ix-figure up-front tuition costs if I didn't play my cards right. This hasn't done my continuing education/career prospects any good, but in mid-life I don't feel comfortable playing poker for >$100k of non-dischargeable student loan debt.

"More and more of us know more and more examples of college graduates who live in their parents' basements because they can't support themselves with their college diploma."

Source? Or just speculation? I for one, know many people living in basements, but not a single one of them has a college degree. Anecdotal evidence only goes so far.

"It's time to be more discerning consumers of higher education."

Higher education is as necessary today as it has always been, and will continue to be for the forseeable future. We need trained professionals to work on highly technical areas, or we can't progress. How else are we going to have mechanical, aerospace, electrical, chemical engineers and many other professions?

This doesn't mean that a college or university is for everyone though. It is left to each person to balance the very subjective pros and cons of deciding whether to go to college or not. Also no students are forced to attend highly expensive colleges, since most of the time there exists a high quality public institution available.

http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2012/04/half_of_... quotes a number of stats on this.

Over half of recent college grads are underemployed or unemployed. This figure used to be lower in the past. But the shift is smaller than I was honestly expecting, and largely can be attributed to the economy.

I'll balance your anecdote with my own: I too know several who are living at home that have degrees.

Yes, we'll always need STEM people, but I think you're forgetting that STEM is a pretty narrow part of what colleges do. Heck, I've got a buddy who has his degree in Theater. Theater! Why that is a degree option at a university, I have no idea. Not to mention art, comm (which every other person seems to major in), History, English, etc.. These are a little more representative of the "basement" ex-college goers.

For non-technical people, I kind of feel like college is a pretty poor investment. Going to a vocational school would probably pay off more in the end.

This may come as a shock, but not everyone goes to college solely in order to improve their career prospects.

Then you're wasting tax dollars and a slot at a school that could be filled with a student who actually needs an education for the field they plan on entering.

The devaluation of the college degree is partly because of the gross amount of people who go to college for no reason other than to socialize and enjoy themselves.

Uh, that's one possibility. The other possibility is that they're studying something they're truly passionate about, and they aren't focused on how - exactly - the're going to make a living.

I know a number of folks who simply fed their curiosity, and still ended up in productive lives. Indeed, the original purpose of an undergraduate degree was to expand one's horizons. Graduate school was the time and place to focus on profession.

The folks you know wouldn't happen to be over 35 or independently wealthy, would they? Tuitions have gone up tremendously in recent years, and following your bliss like it was 1998 would be a disaster now if you didn't have a good job lined up at the end, or at least a trust fund.

It isn't some recent "devaluation" that the public universities are supposed to be about something other than purely vocational training. When Thomas Jefferson (successfully) advocated setting up the publicly funded University of Virginia, for example, his main aim was to produce a generally educated populace, which had sufficient grounding in all major areas of knowledge—philosophy, science, mathematics, political theory, etc.—to operate a democracy effectively.

The pay and employment gap between college graduates and non-graduates is actually higher in non-STEM fields, though, which seems to suggest that it's a more important credential if you're non-technical than if you are.

I don't know what statistic you're referring to, but there are an awful lot of (STEM) fields that have zero jobs if you don't have a degree.

Wait, I'm confused. See, I am about to graduate with a degree in theater. After four years of working my ass off academically and professionally, I have made serious connections in my field. I have learned, in the classroom and co-curricular opportunities, industry best practices as well as "real world eventualities." I have received job offers that are 100% due to the fact that I went to the college that I did, based on that school's reputation, that other students of other colleges (or no college) will not get.

I think that this was a pretty damn good investment, and I certainly understand why it's a degree option. So that people can learn how to do it.

> I certainly understand why it's a degree option. So that people can learn how to do it.

So nobody learned how to do it before it was a degree option?

What does a degree give you that an apprenticeship wouldn't?

As I said, I have opportunities specifically because of the college I attended. A degree has also given me a chance to try other disciplines in the industry than my primary, giving me a chance to learn and try doing scenic art, technical direction, dance shows, and more.

The benefits of a liberal arts education span through the actual degree department too.

My judgement on Theater degrees stands corrected :).

Now, does anybody have something to say on philosophy degrees, or ancient Greek, or does my opinion get to stand on those?

The idea that philosophy and classics don't belong at universities would have shocked nearly all of the great thinkers of Western history. Universities were supposed to be repositories of learning and civilization, not job trainee factories. That they have become the latter is a sign of decay.

Why are you so dismissive of the humanities? I'm a Computer Science major myself, but I can't fathom how you've come to the conclusion that colleges are vocational schools for STEM subjects.

He's dismissive of spending so much money for a humanities degree because it's not a wise investment in this day and age. I don't see his statement as having a problem with the humanities themselves.

Exactly.

I was actually a music composition major before I switched to CS. I don't have anything against non-STEM fields. However, one day I looked at how much I was paying for school, how much I stood to earn, and what hard skills I would walk away with when everything was all said and done, and decided switching to my other love, CS, was a much better way to spend my time at uni.

Have you got a good reference on what I can read on music composition? I have tried to find a starting point and failed.

Theater! Why that is a degree option at a university, I have no idea.

Aristophanes? Shakespeare? A lot of actors learn their craft ithrough studying theater.

Did Aristophanes and Shakespeare need to spend $15,000 to $75,000 per year for 4 to 8 years to learn their craft?

No, but it's worthwhile for other people to spend time and effort studying them.

_Theater! Why that is a degree option at a university_

Maybe because theater is a big business. Disney makes Broadway shows and Cirque du Soleil is a billion dollar business.

But that's beside the point. High quality university education is not trade school. If you have a liberal education you should be ready for a wide range of tasks.

Yikes! I didn't mean to insult all the theater people. However... I don't think you can really compare the overall job prospects of a STEM based major to those of a Theater major.

Yes, some people make a lot of money doing Broadway, but on the whole, I'd wager that the bulk of "actors" live on "getting by" wages. How many steady $60k+ gigs are out there for the taking?

All that said, I may be the victim of sample bias. Though I was never a thespian, my core group of friends growing up consisted mostly of theater people in high school, and then onto college, I still hung out with many thespians, and now, the bulk of them are.. waiters/"actors." There are a couple that are working near constantly, but for very little money; Maybe a couple of hundred dollars for two weeks of shows.

Out of the couple dozen of 2010 and 2011 graduates I know (I'm of their parents' generation) 20% or fewer are living with their parents. I would be embarrassed to ask whether they've had to move into the basement. Those who have moved out are not for the most part in STEM fields.

All I have to do is take one quick look at unemployment rates to understand just how valuable college is. In the rhetoric over rising costs, the benefits have never been more clear.

Could you elaborate?

The unemployment rate for college degree holders has more or less been 50% less than the overall rate for the last several years. College degree holders, as a class, weathered this recession far better than anyone else.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm

And of course the fact that the richer and/or smarter of us tend to be the ones who attend college is not a factor at all.

The real concern is not whether college degree holders, as a class, do better, but whether a 17-19 year old would do better by entering that class. What those statistics don't include is something for recent grads. Ideally, you'd want to look at the unemployment rates for people approximately 24-30, stratified by college degree or not. And even then, it wouldn't necessarily give you a complete picture, due to all kinds of selection bias in the people who do or do not go to college. I would predict, however, that the unemployment rate for recent grads would be closer to the non-college graduate rate for the same age than to the all-ages college graduate rate.

It's difficult to say for many reasons. You have selection bias going on, and maybe a bit of cargo cult ingrained into society. Not that I'm against college, but to make it a primary cause is probably not very accurate.

Huge correlation = causation implication in your comment. It's not clear how much intrinsic value college has vs what its signalling[1] value is for the people who go through it, and what alternate signalling approaches are available to them elsewhere.

Many college degrees are an indication that you have the determination to spend (aka waste) a big chunk of your money and youth to prove your ability to persevere, or indicate to other people that you're made of the right kind of stuff. The older I get, the more dismissive I am of college (undergraduate level) as anything other than a social marker.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signalling_(economics)

I agree, but we need to control for recessionary effects, no?

Place $100K (let's leave it at $25k /a year) in an investment account when you're 18-22 and take it out 40 years later. Add the fact that you are not working for 4 years and it's even more.

I am not dissing college, bu let's compare fairly: college isn't free, it requires lots of time and money.

On the other hand, factory jobs were sent to China or replaced by robots and there is work only for x number of plumbers, mechanics and electricians. Individually, everyone is trying to do better than the other, until they get the bill and have no jobs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com