Columns

College's Diminishing Returns

By: Kathleen Parker | Posted: January 29, 2014 3:55 AM
Kathleen Parker mug

WASHINGTON -- President Obama is correct in wanting to make higher education more affordable and accessible, but Americans would also be correct in wondering just what they're paying for.

The need for a better-educated populace is beyond dispute. Without critical thinking skills and a solid background in history, the arts and sciences, how can a nation hope to govern itself?

Answer: Look around.

The problem isn't only that higher education is unaffordable to many but that even at our highest-ranked colleges and universities, students aren't getting much bang for their buck.

Since 1985, the price of higher education has increased 538 percent, according to a new study from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), a nonprofit, nonpartisan research group that encourages trustees and alumni to foster improvement where institutions may be reluctant to go against popular trends.

For perspective, compare tuition increases to a "mere" 286 percent increase in medical costs and a 121 percent increase in the consumer price index during the same period, according to ACTA.

Although the council confined its research in this study -- "Education or Reputation?" -- to the 29 top-ranked liberal-arts schools in the nation, where tuition, boarding and books typically run more than $50,000 per year, the trends highlighted are not confined to smaller, elite institutions. These include an increasing lack of academic rigor, grade inflation, high administrative costs and a lack of intellectual diversity.

While these recent findings are not so surprising to those who follow such studies, one can still be stunned by what can only be described as a breach of trust between colleges and the students they attract with diversions and amenities that have little bearing on education and will be of little use in the job market.

One need only be reminded of the recent scandal at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, where a whistleblower revealed that phony classes and fake grades have been offered mostly to athletes since the 1990s.

UNC, one of the historically great institutions of higher learning, quite apart from its legendary basketball team, is scrambling now to repair its damaged reputation with oversight and other fixes. But reputations, cultivated over decades and sometimes centuries, are like love -- hard to repair once trust is broken.

On the flip side, ACTA proposes that many schools, rather than offering the educational quality that earned them a golden reputation in the first place, often depend on public reverence for the past rather than on present performance.

Of great concern is the diminishing focus on core curriculums -- the traditional arts and science coursework essential to developing critical thinking necessary for civic participation. Among the 29 schools surveyed by ACTA, only three require U.S. government or history, just two require economics and five colleges have no requirements at all.

In a separate study, the National Assessment of Adult Literacy found that though Americans pay the highest per pupil tuition rates in the world, most graduates fall below proficiency in such simple cognitive tasks as comparing viewpoints in two editorials or buying food when given in price per ounce.

Instead of the basics, students might look forward to more entertaining fare, such as Middlebury College's "Mad Men and Mad Women," an examination of masculinity and femininity in mid-20th-century America via the television show "Mad Men."

I confess I'd enjoy a dinner discussion along these lines, but as an education consumer, I'm not sure a semester-long investigation is worth even a tiny percentage of the tuition. ACTA President Anne Neal acknowledges that such courses may be interesting and even valuable.

"What we do question, however, is allowing such classes to stand in lieu of a broad-based American history or government requirement," she said, "when we know how severely lacking students' historical literacy can be."

Given the ever-escalating tuition costs, one may wonder where all that money is going?

Out of the 29 colleges evaluated, 22 have administrative budgets that are at least one-third of what the schools spend on instruction. More than a third of the college presidents earn as much or more than the president of the United States ($400,000), for running schools, many of which have fewer than 2,000 students.

Other findings of the 46-page report are equally compelling but too lengthy for this space. Summed up: American students are paying too much for too little -- and this, too, should concern Obama as he examines ways to make college more affordable. Getting people into college is only half the battle. Getting them out with a useful education seems an equal challenge.



Kathleen Parker's email address is kathleenparker@washpost.com.


(c) 2014, Washington Post Writers Group


Tags: News, Columns

Comments (1)

Rick Conard
4:37PM JAN 29TH 2014
Here's a solution that many college sports fans and the NCAA are sure to hate -- Form an independent federal-level (not state) body -- outside the control of wealthy alumni or the NCAA -- that randomly tests college athletes every year they play. If they fail then their off the team for that year , period, and must be retested prior to playing the following year. Of course, don't hold your breath -- America will never allow transparency measures that would expose the dirty truth about our nation's college sports. I mean what would we American's do with ourselves if we had to admit that our beloved college teams are propped up on the backs of less than academic minded athletes, many of which are too stupid to read even a 4th grade book. Why would some truly smart, college educated people knowingly support (or at least turn a blind eye to) such programs? Because for many weak people, the need to belong to something . . .anything (and the social outlet it provides) is more powerful than our sense of fairness. We should be better than this. Either admit that we need athletics to fund campus programs or take the next step and "hire" talented athletes to play for the entertainment of supporters regardless of their lack of intelligence.

Leave a Comment on This Story

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
To prevent automated spam submissions leave this field empty.