I'm posting a link to an article about 15 students who went to a for profit college and claim they were deceived into taking out more debt than they can afford. This is a subject I'm pretty passionate about.
A little background. I was fortunate enough to have my initial undergraduate education paid for by my hard working and incredibly generous parents. I know this is a luxury that not many people enjoy and I can't discount that. When I decided to go back to school to pursue another BS (nursing), I footed the entire bill. I took out about 35K in loans and worked full time commuting between Amherst, MA and CT on the weekends. I've paid off over 20k in 2 years, as being student loan debt free has been my only financial goal.
I see a lot of my classmates social media posts about how student loan debt is an awful burden. Many of these people opted not to work at all throughout the program. And many of these people also (to my knowledge) haven't taken advantage of a perk of our chosen profession, which is ample opportunity to hustle and make extra cash, whether it be through overtime (time and a half) or through a per diem job at another hospital, which generally pay pretty good hourly rates with no benefits.
The point of this post isn't to pat myself on the back. I realize that I've had it pretty good. But going back to school has given me a lot of perspective. The trillions that are owed in federal student loans and the staggering number of people who default is going to come to a boiling point. Will any politicians have the stones to really overhaul student loans? Or will it be a burden on generations of taxpayers for years to come.
Link - (
New Window )
And B..side note about Kent..he and his brother both got perfect scores on their SATs. We had another classmate who was the youngest person ever to publish an article in the National Review. Today, he is an accomplished author of historical books, Richard Brookhiser. So I'm not sure Kent was even the smartest guy in the high school.
We are struggling with whether he should go to a good college where he received good $ to attend or whether he should attend one of the top schools where he will need to borrow a good chunk of money. It's a tough decision.
And B..side note about Kent..he and his brother both got perfect scores on their SATs. We had another classmate who was the youngest person ever to publish an article in the National Review. Today, he is an accomplished author of historical books, Richard Brookhiser. So I'm not sure Kent was even the smartest guy in the high school.
What HS if you don't mind?
I apologize to Ned for millering his thread. It's a great topic and one that I am passionate about. These kids deserve better from us. I can't believe we are sticking the youth of America...our future..with this mess.
Bankruptcy should also be back on the table again. It's one thing when it's 5 grand in the 70s. Now it's 100, 150, 200 + grand and growing PER STUDENT. And at 8.5% interest. Insanity. We need to do better. Put your money where your mouth is politician's who espouse how important education is.
I think BinALB made a great point about employers working hand in hand with the colleges/trade schools. Often colleges are not teaching exactly what is needed to learn/experience a particular job.
Having employers make requests and seeing to it they hire the students that completed the suggested training is the way to go. I'm not suggesting you do away with standard colleges courses, just tailor the major to what the employers will need in the near future by taking input from...those employers.
Quote:
college does not = jobs. Just means you have a shot at a higher paying job which is a good thing. Unfortunately, too many graduates are unable to cash in on their education.
I think BinALB made a great point about employers working hand in hand with the colleges/trade schools. Often colleges are not teaching exactly what is needed to learn/experience a particular job.
Having employers make requests and seeing to it they hire the students that completed the suggested training is the way to go. I'm not suggesting you do away with standard colleges courses, just tailor the major to what the employers will need in the near future by taking input from...those employers.
Whenever I have one of my industry partners speak at a school I ask them to wash their truck and hook up their boat or trail their bikes before driving to the school.
It may sound crazy but kids see that a possible employer is loving life and they respond very positively.
It's truly a "holy shit" moment for the kids.
Strategically, I make this happen either on the on-site school lab area or if the weather is never we all meet outside.
It shows tangible evidence of what is possible.
Maybe things are different today, but 30 years ago, it was plain as day the students who had skin in the game. Yes, it's painting with a broad brush, and lots (maybe even the majority) who were being given a free ride by parents studied hard and made the most of their opportunities. But I saw way too many free riders who thought it was a joke, that this was an opportunity to have a good time, school came second, Daddy will pay for additional semesters if necessary. pay part or all of the ride mostly studied hard as hell, because they knew additional semesters came on their own dime.
I'm all in favor of extending education opportunities, but it needs to have a way to control abuses. And personally, the higher the level of opportunity we afford our youth, the lower the level of safety net we allow them if they decide not to avail themselves of it. For starters, no welfare if you can't bother to graduate high school. My single biggest expense in life is school tax, and there are a significant number of doofusses who think it's ok to drop out and then suck off the taxpayer when they find they can't make it in life.
Your view of this issue is unbelievably short-sighted and, with respect, extremely ignorant.
No, I get it. Having more educated individuals is a good thing. More people with a college degree (even if it is associates) is a good thing and it enables them to get better jobs. The only area where I disagree is who should fund it. I think if it went to vote, you would find that in general the population would be split on the idea of making it tax payer funded.
I agree with your point to some extent. As someone who has hired quite a few college grads, it is less about WHERE you went to school and virtually never about your grades in school. It comes down to job experience. What have you done? Just went to a good school? who cares? Can you do the job? That is what will make one student more attractive to employers vs another. There are schools that have a great co-op program. You get real work experience in your industry before graduating so you have more than just a degree. It also allows you an opportunity to truly experience what working in that industry may be like so that you have an opportunity to find out that it may not be for you.
Quote:
it's last-dollar and a driver of making better contributors to the overall economy.
Your view of this issue is unbelievably short-sighted and, with respect, extremely ignorant.
No, I get it. Having more educated individuals is a good thing. More people with a college degree (even if it is associates) is a good thing and it enables them to get better jobs. The only area where I disagree is who should fund it. I think if it went to vote, you would find that in general the population would be split on the idea of making it tax payer funded.
I see that as penny wise, pound foolish, Eric.
"Even if it is associates" - see? This is the exact nonsense that I'm talking about. 65% of the jobs in this country require just that. Yet it's people like you who perpetuate the thought that a two-year degree is somehow automatically not worthy of the conversation. It's despicable.
Yet, I guarantee you - the kid with skills and a degree and a certification created by industry and relationships cultivated with employers through those two years enters the workforce quicker, with a clear purpose and past on mind, and with a more upward trajectory than the kid with a non-specialized degree who just incurred over a $100k in debt.
We need to change the thinking in this country.
Not to mention the altruism that should be inherent in funding education - that is too often forgotten in the lottery ticket haze created by higher education.
lylesilverman@gmail.com
lylesilverman@gmail.com
Sent.
We need to require all educational institutions to provide better information so students can make better choices. Private vs state, it really depends on what your child wishes to do, and the school's reputation in that area. Will additional expense payoff. Compare % of students that receive grants and average amount awarded. You may be surprised. My son did go to one of those pricey liberal art schools but his student loans ended up being less than many who attended state.
Headhunter your right it's not the 70s anymore. The degree matters and often the school.
Too many kids today just do not take school seriously. If they are on the hook for some of this debt (even interest free), then they may actually study.
The tax payers would end up funding tuition for kids that do not even show up for class.
This is the land of the free...not the land where things are free.
I agree with your post, Eric. The second time around having all the skin in the game, I realized what a great asset community colleges are. I was able to take 6 or 7 hard science pre requisite classes for a fraction of the cost that they would have cost at even a state school. I also took advantage of my employer's tuition reimbursement. Granted, as I said, this was after I had a BA fully funded, had the benefit of hindsight and was 23 years old.
Lastly sorry Eric, I disagree. As a parent and employer, I've found the kids today far more mature and focused than my generation.
some of them are truly evil. prey on the poor and also the military. and protected by politicians
Personally, I would like to see a culture change with more emphasis on utility of the degree for future jobs. That is how I would approach HS as well, where I wish we would emphasize going to college less for many or most students, in favor of apprenticeships, internships, practical studies. I would like to see a business culture where most professions seriously re-evaluate themselves and determine in their hiring practices what specific skills are needed to succeed and whether college (or a 4 year degree) is necessary. I would also like to see employers look beyond whether a degree itself is all you need and evaluate the curriculum taken by the prospective employee. How we "see" a college degree, in the context of employment needs to be changed at a cultural level, IMO. Just to add a gratuitous political comment here, IMO the Washington Post and whoever the NYT columnist was were absolutely asinine in their hit pieces to insinuate that two more courses in gym or basket-weaving to gain a degree dictates whether Scott Walker is fit to be President. That's mind boggling to me.
I would like to see extensive curricular changes or at least a change in culture on how we view curricula. IMO, if your degree ends in "Studies", then I would throw that degree away and eliminate that major. IN fact, I would likely go through any college handbook and eliminate 75% of the offered majors. Most are added to sop faculty egos, improve their tenure chances, allow them to teach the niche without having to broaden their own education in their own field and serve no practical future importance.
Other changes I would make would be to encourage reduction of the number of colleges, consolidate colleges, share faculty, etc. I would also severely restrict non-classroom activities and bring the focus more on education. That would include inside the dormitories. I wish the culture would change to deemphasize whatever euphemisms are used for non-educational, non-responsiblity things..."learning about life", "finding yourself", "exploring adulthood" etc. In that vein, I would generally encourage, and for people going on loans or scholarship maybe even require a minimal (maybe 2 years?) spacing between HS and college. Gain experience, mature, build some funds to provide a base for your loan, etc.
And, definitively, the schools need to change. Tuition increases should not out-pace inflation. Tenure rules and sabbatical should be tightened so that teachers without a strong, definable, and revenue-producing research component are required to increase their teaching burden so that overall faculty numbers are held in check. I would also like the Feds to seriously evaluate and strongly scrutinize indirect costs to keep infrastructure changes at a level of what's necessary as opposed to "well we have the money and can always raise tuition so lets do this..."
basically if you added all the money the fed already spends on college education in loans , grants etc
and instead just use that money to fund students to go public university for free
Exactly How Much Would It Cost to Make Public Colleges Tuition-Free? (An Update.) - ( New Window )
Quote:
it's last-dollar and a driver of making better contributors to the overall economy.
Your view of this issue is unbelievably short-sighted and, with respect, extremely ignorant.
No, I get it. Having more educated individuals is a good thing. More people with a college degree (even if it is associates) is a good thing and it enables them to get better jobs. The only area where I disagree is who should fund it. I think if it went to vote, you would find that in general the population would be split on the idea of making it tax payer funded.
And there's a part where you're not 'getting it'.
There are right around 160 folks where I work that have HS degree or equivalent that make $90K+/year. Another 20 that have a skilled trade that make $150K or more a year. Most of the skilled guys actually make more than the management staff, including the ME's.
The idea that a degree gives you the chance at a "higher paying job" just is not the case for the most part. Sure, it's better than retail (although I know more than a few folks that spent a whole lot on a degree that ended up working retail) for the most part- but it depends on the type of degree, and the job market.
I've been saying for years, and still believe that most kids should be encouraged to go to technical school rather than college. They'll make more money, be less in debt, and actually contribute something useful.
Personally, I would like to see a culture change with more emphasis on utility of the degree for future jobs. That is how I would approach HS as well, where I wish we would emphasize going to college less for many or most students, in favor of apprenticeships, internships, practical studies. I would like to see a business culture where most professions seriously re-evaluate themselves and determine in their hiring practices what specific skills are needed to succeed and whether college (or a 4 year degree) is necessary. I would also like to see employers look beyond whether a degree itself is all you need and evaluate the curriculum taken by the prospective employee. How we "see" a college degree, in the context of employment needs to be changed at a cultural level, IMO. Just to add a gratuitous political comment here, IMO the Washington Post and whoever the NYT columnist was were absolutely asinine in their hit pieces to insinuate that two more courses in gym or basket-weaving to gain a degree dictates whether Scott Walker is fit to be President. That's mind boggling to me.
I would like to see extensive curricular changes or at least a change in culture on how we view curricula. IMO, if your degree ends in "Studies", then I would throw that degree away and eliminate that major. IN fact, I would likely go through any college handbook and eliminate 75% of the offered majors. Most are added to sop faculty egos, improve their tenure chances, allow them to teach the niche without having to broaden their own education in their own field and serve no practical future importance.
Other changes I would make would be to encourage reduction of the number of colleges, consolidate colleges, share faculty, etc. I would also severely restrict non-classroom activities and bring the focus more on education. That would include inside the dormitories. I wish the culture would change to deemphasize whatever euphemisms are used for non-educational, non-responsiblity things..."learning about life", "finding yourself", "exploring adulthood" etc. In that vein, I would generally encourage, and for people going on loans or scholarship maybe even require a minimal (maybe 2 years?) spacing between HS and college. Gain experience, mature, build some funds to provide a base for your loan, etc.
And, definitively, the schools need to change. Tuition increases should not out-pace inflation. Tenure rules and sabbatical should be tightened so that teachers without a strong, definable, and revenue-producing research component are required to increase their teaching burden so that overall faculty numbers are held in check. I would also like the Feds to seriously evaluate and strongly scrutinize indirect costs to keep infrastructure changes at a level of what's necessary as opposed to "well we have the money and can always raise tuition so lets do this..."
Great post, Bill. I agree 110% on putting an end to degrees that end in 'studies.' There are so many liberal arts degrees that are essentially useless.
Quote:
In comment 12154651 B in ALB said:
Quote:
it's last-dollar and a driver of making better contributors to the overall economy.
Your view of this issue is unbelievably short-sighted and, with respect, extremely ignorant.
No, I get it. Having more educated individuals is a good thing. More people with a college degree (even if it is associates) is a good thing and it enables them to get better jobs. The only area where I disagree is who should fund it. I think if it went to vote, you would find that in general the population would be split on the idea of making it tax payer funded.
And there's a part where you're not 'getting it'.
There are right around 160 folks where I work that have HS degree or equivalent that make $90K+/year. Another 20 that have a skilled trade that make $150K or more a year. Most of the skilled guys actually make more than the management staff, including the ME's.
The idea that a degree gives you the chance at a "higher paying job" just is not the case for the most part. Sure, it's better than retail (although I know more than a few folks that spent a whole lot on a degree that ended up working retail) for the most part- but it depends on the type of degree, and the job market.
I've been saying for years, and still believe that most kids should be encouraged to go to technical school rather than college. They'll make more money, be less in debt, and actually contribute something useful.
2. Debt forgiveness is a joke. I'm fortunate that my student loans are all paid off. But before they were, I applied for debt forgiveness because I've worked for a certain amount of years in a Title I school. I was denied, because I was paying off two loans, and I couldn't get the first loan forgiven because I had the second loan, and I couldn't get the second loan forgiven because I had the first loan. It's all smoke and mirrors.
Where society has gone wrong, as many people, including Cam, have said is that college isn't the only place you can gain a job skill. the colleges are going to keep on advertising that college is necessary. What society needs is to realistically promote the idea that college isn't necessary, but job skills are. the 'for profit' institutions may be predatory in this sector, but that shouldn't discourage us from encouraging the notion of skillset is everything. No job skill, and no hazardous job, means you're just another face in the crowd of the unwashed masses.
the mantra is work smarter, not harder. smarter doesn't always mean college.
Where society has gone wrong, as many people, including Cam, have said is that college isn't the only place you can gain a job skill. the colleges are going to keep on advertising that college is necessary. What society needs is to realistically promote the idea that college isn't necessary, but job skills are. the 'for profit' institutions may be predatory in this sector, but that shouldn't discourage us from encouraging the notion of skillset is everything. No job skill, and no hazardous job, means you're just another face in the crowd of the unwashed masses.
the mantra is work smarter, not harder. smarter doesn't always mean college.
+1
Said much better than I.
Instead, we should focus on need. And the need that lies in the skilled trades (construction, manufacturing, energy, petrochem, shipbuilding) offers young people a real and tangible opportunity to (1) make a great income; (2) own your own business; (3) hold a sense of pride in their craftsmanship; (4) travel - and many more.
The alternative to 4 years of college is 4 years of apprenticeship. You incur no debt and have a job all along the way. Once you end your apprenticeship as a journey-level craftsman you're earning far more than the college grad and you have tangible and marketable skills.
But our society is more concerned with appearance than reality. Sad.
a perfect example of why free college, or lenient repayment terms need some guidelines. but please, pay his loans so he can move out.
is this a guy we want to have mercy on?
I beg him to get back into accounting, but he'd rather wallow in the self pity of 'I can't get a job that pays enough, Mommy help me pay my bills'
I'm in my mid 50's. there's plenty of stories similar to mine amongst my peers. there are also plenty of hard working youth's who are doing what it takes to survive. very few of them are whining about the injustice of repaying college costs.
I'm glad you agreed.
I'm not sure free means what you think it does.
Quote:
College is basically free over there.
I'm not sure free means what you think it does.
Yeah, someone is paying. They just don't bury their kids in debt is all.
Cheaper without a doubt. I'm not sure about free. My nephew did a semester abroad in Germany last fall and tuition was charged by the German university, not the one in the US he attended. It could be because he was a foreign student, but (again) it was not free. Of course my sister was pleased that the tuition was the same as what she paid 30 years ago.
only costs me 6 grand a year as a land owner....says the guy who never had kids and has a lower class dwelling he calls home, and is one of thousands of such folk living in the school district. Add another 4 years on top of that for everyone, I'll be paying 12 grand a year. Suzie homebaker won't have her room and board paid while she's learning how to cook, but she won't have to pay tuition.
(OK, so the 6 grand covers K-12, and the math is just a wee bit off. the principle remains the same. Aint nothing free in this world)
It's when you start adding on the room and board that college costs double or triple. IF you need to go out of town, say for culinary arts, then your expenses are going to be more, but if you don't and you choose to, then quit whining.
Not sure you can reverse the situation now. But, I do like the idea of making community college free.
Link - ( New Window )
I think this is a universal thought. My opinion is that when they changed the system, some lobbyists got in the picture (as they usually do every time the gov't tries to do something - like with health care) and got big business some nice bennies. So, it goes from trying to correct the system to fucking it up even more. this pessimism goes right to the core of why I think less gov't is better. I'm a firm believer that more regulation is better, but I also think big gov't makes for fucking up the system even more.
I think this is a universal thought. My opinion is that when they changed the system, some lobbyists got in the picture (as they usually do every time the gov't tries to do something - like with health care) and got big business some nice bennies. So, it goes from trying to correct the system to fucking it up even more. this pessimism goes right to the core of why I think less gov't is better. I'm a firm believer that more regulation is better, but I also think big gov't makes for fucking up the system even more.
Big business makes money but they're not the only ones profiting from colleges. For full and even associated professors it can be something approximating a sinecure, a well-paid if not necessarily lucrative endeavor with limited teaching responsibilities and pleasant enough working and living conditions. For the ever-expanding crop if administrators it can be lucrative too. Colleges lobby for access to loans because it prevents them from having to tighten their own belts, to reduce majors that aren't marketable, to limit quality of life stuff, etc etc. In short, it allows colleges and their personalities to maintain their little cocoons, with all that they entail.
Not sure you can reverse the situation now. But, I do like the idea of making community college free. Link - ( New Window )
It could be that he was already enrolled when tuition was eliminated, but there was tuition. I looked at a couple of universities in the town he stayed in and they did charge an "administration fee". But the main point, that it was much, much cheaper, is valid.
I've been saying for years, and still believe that most kids should be encouraged to go to technical school rather than college. They'll make more money, be less in debt, and actually contribute something useful.
I agree with this Cam. In fact, I think some kids may be better off learning how to be a plumber or electrician and then starting their own business afterwards.
Maybe I am wrong... I just always believed that plumbers and electricians were tradesmen.
You did. I mis-spoke. meant to say that I thought learning to be an electrician was something you could do at a technical school.
In the end, it is a good idea. Too many kids graduate from college with a degree but with no skills.
Notice the low unemployment rate for education. Just a tad bit ironic.
Link - ( New Window )