"My Valuable, Cheap College Degree"

[garyd63]

I'm wondering about the board's reaction to this oped in yesterday's NYT. Don't be too quick to jump to conclusions. It's by Arthur C. Brooks who is president of the American Enterprise Institute and a former professor at Syracuse University. He supports the the so-called "10K- B.A." degree. Here's a taste from the article:

I followed the 10K-B.A. with a 5K-M.A. at a local university while working full time, and then endured the standard penury of being a full-time doctoral fellow in a residential Ph.D. program. The final tally for a guy in his 30s supporting a family: three degrees, zero debt.

Did I earn a worthless degree? Hardly. My undergraduate years may have been bereft of frissons, but I wound up with a career as a tenured professor at Syracuse University, a traditional university. I am now the president of a Washington research organization.

Not surprisingly, my college experience has occasionally been the target of ridicule. It is true that I am no Harvard Man. But I can say with full confidence that my 10K-B.A. is what made higher education possible for me, and it changed the course of my life. More people should have this opportunity, in a society that is suffering from falling economic and social mobility.

GO HERE for full article

 

[Eleven]

What is the cost of a degree at Syracuse? Since he equates Syracuse to "making it" and is promoting the 10k type of education, why isn't he staying in that 10k type of environment to further promote his beliefs?

 

[garyd63]

What is the cost of a degree at Syracuse? Since he equates Syracuse to "making it" and is promoting the 10k type of education, why isn't he staying in that 10k type of environment to further promote his beliefs?

Good question, Eleven. I guess he would say that's what he's doing from his on high post with the American Enterprise Institute. But his story does seem to me to be that of a specialized case and not applicable to the large college student population out there. Having said that, Brooks's pitch is one we're hearing more and more of from business types looking to fix the costs of higher education through radical, "efficient," corporate style approaches. For me, this is a flawed approach because education is not a "product" that is somehow manufactured in cost efficient ways.

 

[Sackalot]

Gary I agree with you it is not a "corporate fix" if it were the market would have already created education that works. For me, the issue of costs associated with higher education goes back to several unintentional steps that have been made on most campuses. For example, entire offices dedicated to student activities (when just 2 decades ago the Dean of Students handled all student activities) and there are several offices like this on any 4 year college campus. Air Conditioning is one example of an unintended situation that adds to costs - virtually no building on a campus had A/C 20 years ago, now all do or are in the process of getting it...that cost a GREAT DEAL OF MONEY, which adds to the costs-to me it is the physical plant and the administrators that come along with that physical plant that has added to the cost so greatly. Pay of faculty isn't the problem (some make more than enough, some make too little honestly) but paying 20-30% more people is the problem and why the costs are increasing and paying for things that people want is what adds to the costs.

The article is a fair assessment. However, putting it into business terms, none of it really matters. If you have the drive, if you have the ability you will find a way to be successful. If you don't have that, you can get all the education that you want to pay for and you still won't do much with it.