The “gainful employment” debate has missed a larger issue, writes Matt Miller, a Center for American Progress fellow, in a Washington Post op-ed. College costs too much.
Soaring student loans unintentionally subsidize practices by both for-profit and not-for-profit colleges that drive the cost of college up.
. . . The federal student loan system subsidizes (1) fat and happy faculties and fancy amenities at traditional nonprofit colleges, as well as (2) hefty earnings at for-profit schools which, after lowering the cost of delivering education, find themselves able to pocket the savings instead of passing them on to the student/consumer.
For-profit educators should use “innovative learning technologies” to lower costs while boosting quality, Miller writes. They can create the “WalMart of higher education,” which will be good for shareholders. Or they can remain in the political doghouse.
Comments & Trackbacks (1) | Post a Comment
at 5:30 am
I believe that the reason we cannot create a “WalMart of higher education” is that education is not a product. Education is a process and schools are an opportunity (and not the only way) to engage in the process. By looking at education as a commodity, we are looking for another way to cheapen education even further. I think that we need to remember that we are paying for this opportunity when we pay for courses at a college (whether that is a local community college or an Ivy league university) not for a slip of paper.
If you want a cheap education, get a library card and exert the effort to read all of the books you can. No teacher is required, but you will have to spend quite a bit of time convincing people that you really have learned the material.