"Also, most college majors do not require differential equations or organic chemistry. "
Each major has certain intermediate and advanced courses that 1/2 of students can’t master even in the major they pursue. So there are some courses in CS, Physics, Psychology , Sociology that are not differential equations or organic chemistry but require similar caliber
Regarding European Univ vs American Colleges, some country’s colleges won’t let you change major easily nor let you take electives from other departments. That also reflects in the cost.
I would if say one can afford $12K for their toddlers in daycare, then shouldn’t complain their in state tuition is $15K. Those who “truly” can’t afford $15K in-state tuition, I think the current financial aid systems can help them out.
It is hard to set a number that is affordable to all or most, unless it is close to free but it makes no sense. At least for those who get less than 2.5 or 2.0 GPA, why pay them to party. If one can’t get 2.0, maybe that college is not meant for you. Go get a job, when you are ready, apply as adult students.
Ucb, when you see these bright, accomplished lower SES kids who have earned an elite opportunity, of course they can need mentoring. Don’t assume the leap from tops in their hs to a tough college is easy peasy. These kids are vetted for strengths, including self advocacy (getting help when they need it, not hiding.)
And that help is available at elites, for a reason.
Denver public schools offer a free breakfast to ALL students every school day, no economic qualifications. Very few take advantage and its fewer still in middle school and high school. My daughter never once ate the free breakfast and she qualified for free lunch too but never ate it. In the summer it is free breakfast and lunches for anyone at some schools in low income areas, and not that many kids take advantage of it. I’m glad it is there for those who do. there are also free snacks at the public rec centers in the summer, all activities are free, and again the younger kids benefit but once they reach middle school they drop out.
Really, how are they going to expand free and reduced lunch to college kids? The schools have to keep records and serve certain foods. My kids’ elementary school (catholic school) didn’t participate because the woman who ran the cafeteria said she tried it and it was just too much trouble and too much oversight- and the kids didn’t like the food. She had her menus and just charged more ($3 instead of $1.40 or whatever public schools charged). One of my kids went to a public school for middle school (k-12 school) and they didn’t participate in the free/reduced program either (or free breakfast). I can’t imagine a college agreeing to do the federal program, or it would have to set aside one cafeteria to do it; the poor kids eat at the prison food cafeteria and the rich kids eat at the nice one? That’s pretty much how the high schools do it around here, with the ‘free lunch’ program line and the prepackaged, grab-n-go line. Guess which line is longer?
I’m a big believer that all school lunch programs should be free to all - they are kids, feed them. Get rid of the administrative paperwork of who qualifies and who doesn’t, just give them food. Give them white milk and get rid of all the juice and power drinks and crap at the schools. But by college? No.
Since overall graduation rates are at least 60%*, it is not true that half of students cannot pass the intermediate and advanced courses in their majors.
*60% is the overall 6-year graduation rate from the first college attended. Overall graduation rate would be higher if students who transfer and graduate from another school are counted.
Getting under a 2.0 GPA (regardless of whether partying is involved) tends to lead to academic dismissal.
So does it make sense to you that the tiny number of low SES students who are vetted for strengths including self advocacy need mentoring more than the much larger number who attend community colleges and public universities?
I brought up the better mentoring at elites. Of course. I’m not saying others wouldn’t benefit. Infact, in 298, I suggested solid mentoring be a staple of an opportunity program, not leaving kids st the gate.
The problem may be the sink or swim at many colleges. Not my suggestion.
This is just one meaningless anecdote about one girl who has a problem with math and is getting help for that problem. Maybe there is a learning disability here - discaculia comes to mind. Without knowing anything else about this girl, its impossible to know whether or not she should attend college. Maybe she is a brilliant writer or historian. Maybe she is one of the many kids who would benefit more from trade school of some kind. In any case, no one here is arguing that all kids need a four year college degree, only that kids who are bright enough to benefit from one, should have access.
Unlike the NY program they don’t require students to stay in-state after graduation and pays in addition to other grants, not just the last dollar. It also applies to shorter programs for certifications and apprenticeships.
Assuming those kind of plans increase the application numbers towards in-state public universities, then without increasing available admission slots admission to those schools should get academically more competitive, which runs counter to the common argument that free tuition would waist tax payer money on unqualified students.
If paying the cost is the issue then maybe the solution would be to have employers that benefit from having fully educated/trained potential new employees help the shoulder the cost. The way to do that would not be to leverage a tax on employers but expand the number of co-op programs and ensure that the students are payed sufficiently to help offset the cost of their tuition. That way it’s a win-win. Employers only pay to train students that they could potentially hire and more students would be funneled towards practical degrees. The only downside is that it could possibly lead to the demise of humanities programs. One way to solve that problem though would be to require students regardless of degree to take a number of humanities/arts/social studies courses so while they wouldn’t necessarily be majoring in those disciplines there would still be enough students taking courses to support maintaining those departments.
This is already the norm in the US, a few open curriculum schools notwithstanding. But having students take general education courses does not necessarily make enough demand for the department to continue offering a major in the subject.
“service” courses (gen ed) don’t make for university departments, which should include advanced seminars based on professors’ research. However, because Humanities/Social Science classes tend to be the cheapest classes, those majors could not billed very differently than the co-op students whose employer would be paid.
Made more sense for companies to train employees when there was lifetime employment. Now there is a lot more mobility among companies or even careers. There will always be training as to the specific company but nothing like what you see in college.
Since I wrote #290:
I did NOT argue that everyone should have a 4-year degree. Rather, that college should be as readily available as high school was 100 years ago.
(In 1900, about 6% students completed HS; in 1906-1910, HS access and affordability went through a major policy push due to three needs: nationalism/integration,economic growth, and individual emancipation. That push was forceful and successful: They were around 35%, where we are wrt 4-year college graduation, around 1930. In the 1950s, completing HS became the norm for American youth, yielding enormous economic gains and soft power.
For further information, here’s an economics paper by Harvard: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:2664307)
Our society WILL need more college graduates but we’ll still need fulfillment center/fast food/retail workers, we’ll still need delivery and truck drivers (in the foreseable future at least), old age carers… Not everyone is suited for college studies nor is interested.
However the number of jobs that do not require a college degree (AS, Certificate, BS, BA) has shrunk. “Entry level” typically requires some post-HS studies and a BS/BA’s signaling value is there to stay. So, if you want any sort of stable job, if you want to be middle class (even lower middle class), you need a college degree. By definition, some people won’t be middle class. But we don’t have castes, supposedly American society starts with the premise that if you work hard to can improve your lot. College is it. (You can work the fries at McDonald’s 60 hours a week and still make less than 30K a year.)
The thread deals only with students who are qualified and interested in college (and keep in mind many of us have argued for trades and certificates/AS): what should it cost so they can attend a public university/a CC?
100 years ago, you could start as a teacher or accountant with a high school diploma - it’s totally impossible nowadays.
In addition, just like horsegrooms and blacksmiths, which were commonplace, are now close to defunct, so are we in a time of change.
College is the way to adapt to the 21st century - not just individually but collectively.
Do you really think China is investing billions in Higher Education, pushing more and more students to further education colleges and universities, creating entire universities, offering full rides to students from African and Asian countries, because they’re bleeding-heart liberals? It’s become a huge strategic stake.
The issue is too many employers require college degrees for jobs that do not really need such degree due to the sheer number of candidates with college degrees. Hence college diplomas are the new high school diploma in certain cases. Does a retail manager need a college degree really? Or does a dental assistant? That one used to be on the job training. We moved to credential everything when in fact, on the job training used to perform this function.
Additionally, high schools have in most cases removed all vocational training. Automotive and wood shop cease to exist. Are they teaching Microsoft skills such as advanced excel? No. I believe AP CS still teaches about floppy disks. Our primary education system really lacks in this area. There is a critical shortages of certain high paying skills that are not gained via a BS or BA as we push everyone into college prep.
Err… AP CSP briefly teaches the history of Cs but it doesn’t teach floppydisks as if these were still a thing.
Pushing for a comprehensive vocational program with 11-12th grade apprenticeships would be a first step but it’s very expensive. I agree with you that cutting these programs and pushing everyone into basic college prep was a bad idea but r was cost effective and most parents didn’t object.
In addition, it doesn’t change the fact that at least 70% 21st jobs will require a college education (certificate, associate, bachelor’s).
Complicating things:assive investments in education aren’t necessarily popular.
Yes everyone benefits from a fully educated/trained population but employers directly benefit from having some members of the population trained in specific skills. I don’t know how it is in the U.S. but here in Canada there are routinely articles in the paper about employers bemoaning a supposed "skills shortage’ and how they can’t find people to hire with the necessary skill set required (which is somehow never actually defined) so they have to be able to hire from outside of the country. They complain that universities and colleges aren’t producing graduates with the necessary skills (again never defined) while they post job adverts requesting 2-5 years relevant experience. In other words they want tax payers, prospective employees, competitors, and/or another country, to foot the bill of providing their new employees with the requisite 2-5 years of experience and then they will just poach them instead of doing the training themselves. They are passing the buck. If they want new employees with 2 years of experience specific to their particular industry and needs then they should help shoulder the costs. Co-op programs could do this. One of our top engineering programs factors in 24 months of work experience over the course of 8 terms of education so that by the time the student graduates (in 5 years) they have the requisite 2 years of experience in addition to the academics. Students alternate 4 months of school with a 4 month co-op placement, and the student is paid for their work. Most graduate debt free and have the necessary practical training in addition to theoretical knowledge and so called “soft skills”. Other programs incorporate longer work terms of up to 12-16 months. Obviously this model won’t work for every major but many would. It’s no different than doing an apprenticeship. Teacher’s education and nursing in particular already follow this model. In Germany many white collar jobs like working in banking are treated as apprenticeships with both school and on-the-job training.
Regarding co-op programs, they are fairly common in the US, at least for engineering, though only a few universities make them a prominent part of the bachelor’s degree programs. But that still does not prevent a student who did a co-op at employer X from choosing employer Y at graduation.
I don’t know who said it but it was stated that CUNY was never free. That isn’t correct. CUNY was free up until 1976. It also was extremely competitive and slective up until that point. NYU was consider a backup for the people who couldn’t get into CUNY.