Troubling Debt Loads at Graduation and Useless College Degrees

George_Phillies

5 years ago

In the exact sciences, physics and chemistry, the only significant degree beyond the bachelor’s degree is the Doctorate. Mechanical Engineering is the reverse … a master’s degree is a step up. However, in the exact sciences, as a student you do not pay them. They pay you, with a grad student salary, full tuition, and perhaps health insurance. If you are admitted to a Ph.D. granting program — in the sciences you do not try to do a Master’s degree first, that misses the point –you reasonably expect tuition and some sort of assistantship. If they do not give you an assistantship, research or teaching, or rarely a fellowship, they are saying they do not want you to show up.

0

davebarnes2

5 years ago

My daughter has a BA English.

She works for high-tech company in a marketing/sales role and makes big bucks.

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Much as I hate to correct Paul Hill, the real problem is universities are moving to the master’s degree as the qualifying professional degree (and in some cases to doctorate–eg Pharmacy). Universities are doing this because of higher tuition revenue for grad students (even after tuition/grad assistant-ships) and increased graduate subsidies for state-schools. In this new model, class sizes are not smaller, and course quality is no better, but the programs are far more profitable. Other factors at work–a move to incorporate general education into once-professional undergraduate degrees, and an overall lack of quality in high school graduates (in terms of prior coursework and intellect).

The problem will continue until universities are responsible to the crap they produce.

0

RJM Consulting

5 years ago

Financialization is increasingly the backbone of US economy, and the securitization of student loans is an effect, not a cause of the excessive demand for higher education. The schools are merely making lemonade from the firehose of lemons. Digging deeper, the American culture has extended adolescence of the youth such that 18 is the old 14. Today’s 18 year olds are, on average, incapable of truly independent life. Radical idea: extend high school to six years but allow transition out after four. For those with the focus and maturity to attend college, fine. But return to a method of failing the failures. Grade inflation means more debt and persistence in a field for which the student is a poor candidate. If there was a serious risk of washing out, the choice of major would be more carefully considered. As for the extra two years in HS, it would cover the college core classes with a similar regime of failing means leaving. Let the process of maturation be guided by displayed maturity. Coddling the 18-20year olds who binge drink on the weekends on their parents (or bank’s) dime has got us here.

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Reply to RJM Consulting

Accommodating the status quo is NOT a solution. Adding two years of high school will add more garbage to an already garbage-filled curriculum. BTW, the same problem occurs at the college-level.

What we are witnessing is merely the end result of many years of declining standards. On the other hand, women who were once great teachers are now in the boardroom, doctors, engineers, etc. Today’s young teachers pale by comparison. Brainwashed by college liberals, and with average or below average IQ, today’s teachers barely understand what they try to teach.

0

Carl_R

5 years ago

Reply to Captain Ahab

I don’t think that’s it at all. I think it is that teaching a political view has become more important than the academic material. As a result, students need to reach the masters level today before they get the same academic exposure they once had in college.

0

thimk

5 years ago

“If we are lending money that ostensibly we
don’t have to kids who have no hope of making it back in order to train
them for jobs that clearly don’t exist, I might suggest that we’ve gone
around the bend a little bit,” — Mike Rowe ( Dirty Jobs ) quote.

0

Blurtman

5 years ago

Becoming an unproductive, debt-crippled member of society, putting off starting a family, buying a house, while you struggle to ultimately turn it around in your ’40’s or ’50’s, if you ever do at all, is not a good thing. Compare this to the fabled comp sci major, who hits the ground running in his mid-’20’s, and who can learn about history in his spare time.

And think about the well-meaning parents or grandparents who co-signed on the loans for the now $200k indebted supermarket bagger who can’t make his loan payments.

0

davebarnes2

5 years ago

Reply to Blurtman

But, then, learning English might spare you from Apostrophe Abuse.

0

Doug78

5 years ago

Schools over-charge for many of the Humanities degrees. A history major costs much less to teach than majors in the sciences who require expensive equipment and facilities yet he is charged exactly the same tuition. Humanity majors subsidize Science ones.

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Reply to Doug78

Actually, not true. Humanities classes are general-ed courses, so that students in engineering, science, technology, etc have to take enough to meet degree credit requirements. These gen ed. courses are largely taught by humanities grad. assistants and part-time faculty, or the courses are mega-FTE with hundreds of students crowded into a lecture hall. There is no such requirement for humanities students to take engineering courses–I wonder why?

0

Doug78

5 years ago

Reply to Captain Ahab

My degrees are in Microbiology and the lab buildings were built like sealed bunkers because that is the federal requirement and the equipment we used cost millions. I may be wrong but I doubt if a history or philosophy major would cost the same. The TA”s are cheap but where and how they teach isn’t. In all fairness they should charge less for the Humanities and more for the Sciences seen that one costs more than the other and that the job pays more too.

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Reply to Doug78

Suppliers, whether colleges or automobile manufacturers, should charge based on perceived value. Cost is relevant only to budgeting and the amount of profit being made. BTW, the same is true of suppliers of labor, eg. whether professors or microbiologists. Thus, students at the #1-ranked microbiology program should be willing to pay more for tuition, while the faculty of said program, in being more valuable by virtue of superior skills etc, should be paid more than faculty at the #99th ranked microbiology program. incidentally, the #99th ranked program probably should be out of business with its expensive infrastructure. Losing sight of this has caused the current situation.

0

Doug78

5 years ago

Reply to Captain Ahab

In principle that would be the case but the top schools in Microbiology have very different tuition rates but they all a few thing in common and that is major financial backing from the NIH and other sources. Microbiology is very expensive to teach .Here is a list of the best schools and their tuition rates.

https://learn.org/articles/What_Are_the_Top_Microbiology_Schools_in_the_US.html#:~:text=%20What%20are%20Three%20Top%20Microbiology%20Schools%3F%20,ranked%20number%20one%20for%20its%20graduate…%20More%20

0

TexasTim65

5 years ago

Interestingly, Charles Hugh Smith wrote an article on this same subject today.

https://www.oftwominds.com/blog.html

Crazy how the debt load went from 0 in 1993 to 1.7 trillion today. Colleges/Universities have games the system so badly to over charge students and over pay professors, build buildings etc.

0

Eddie_T

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

They don’t overpay professors…..other than the Nobel winner types who write all the grants. Most of the money goes to the new middle management layer that didn’t even exist when I was in school. The real teaching jobs are filled with foreign grad students working for peanuts. That leads to poor instruction and too much dependence on people like Fauci doling out the NIH money.

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

How much is ‘overpaid’ in salary dollars/benefits? While subject dependent, a junior (assistant) professor will likely have bachelor, master, and Ph.D. degrees. He/she will have graduated at/near the top of the class, have various papers published presented at conferences, and may have grants. In teaching a given course, he/she is expected to have mastery of the subject, and be current.

That said, the assistant prof may teach 2-3 courses per semester, may get additional pay for summer, and extra duties. He/she may spend 20+ hours a week in research activities, community service, etc.

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

I started a program for an MS in Comp Sci earlier this year.

I had planned to do that before but when Biden and the Dems started talking about forgiving student loans, I decided I wouldn’t pay up-front (that was the original plan). So I’m loading up on debt to pay for my masters via “Direct” D.O.E. loans.

If I lose this game, big deal, I’m out the 1.057% loan origination fee. If I win, it’s about a $40K give-me.

The odds are too good not to play this game. It can’t be worse than 10-1 odds on Dems forgiving some student debt before 2024. I would almost gamble on even odds.

0

TexasTim65

5 years ago

Reply to ajc1970

At best I expect them to forgive interest or make all the gov’t loans interest free (they can’t mandate private loans obviously) and extend repayment years. Or they can extend the teachers / non-profit program that lets you wipe out your student debt if you teach or work in non-profit for X number of years. That could be extended to all gov’t jobs.

Too much moral hazard forgiving actual debt otherwise. Those who paid theirs back would rightfully want their money back. Plus those who haven’t gone yet or are thinking about it (like you) would load up on debt the minute it was announced attempting to get it all forgiven.

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

You may be right but the “too much moral hazard” argument doesn’t convince me — “they” (in this case, the Democratic Party) don’t care about that. They do care about buying votes and this is another way to buy some.

“Plus those who haven’t gone yet or are thinking about it (like you) would load up on debt the minute it was announced attempting to get it all forgiven.”

Once they announce it, it’ll be too late to load up (need to get into a full-time program, acquire the proper type of loan and get it to a certain status, and they can write the law with an “as of this date” clause). That’s actually why I’m not taking the deferral period while I’m still studying — just making payments on the loan right off. Load up now while supplies last!

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Reply to ajc1970

Yet another person with his/her hand out. Imagine the entire country doing the same thing, taking advantage of a failing system.

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

Reply to Captain Ahab

I firmly believe they shouldn’t forgive student debt. But if they do, d*n right I’ll accept it.

Same as I accepted those stimulus checks from Trump and Biden.

I’ve paid plenty of taxes. Once dot-gov starts giving them away, I’m getting my share.

0

goldguy

5 years ago

I suppose it depends on what you want to do with your life. I for one, wanted to be a millionaire, I achieved that without any additional education just hard work and great investments.

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

Reply to goldguy

I was a millionaire twice and divorced twice.

My advice: don’t get divorced, and failing that, don’t party like a rock star afterwards.

0

Eddie_T

5 years ago

Reply to ajc1970

They try to argue with me when I say divorce is the biggest wealth destroyer there is….but the stats don’t lie. Adults who are single at retirement have significantly less net worth.

” Married respondents experience per person net worth increases of 77 percent over single respondents. Additionally, their wealth increases on average 16 percent for each year of marriage. Divorced respondents’ wealth starts falling four years before divorce and they experience an average wealth drop of 77 percent. While in percentage terms divorce hurts women more than men, the absolute difference is relatively small in the US.”

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1440783305058478?journalCode=josb

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

Reply to Eddie_T

I won’t argue with that. I haven’t seen data but I’d be willing to bet that divorce is the biggest wealth destroyer. Has been for me, sample size = 2!

0

Eddie_T

5 years ago

Reply to goldguy

My desires at 18 were not the same ones as the one’s I had at 32 when I finished my residency and finally went to work at what would become my life’s work…..and they’re slightly different now than they were then, although some of them are the same. I don’t feel any different with millions in assets than I did when I was flat broke.

I look back on college as being a time of growth and discovery, whereas professional school was more like running a marathon, with 16 hour days piled one on top of one another for four years. The residency was better, I got paid, and also moonlighted.

It was important to me to be a good provider for my family……I was happy to be able to send my kids to college….not one of them borrowed a dime for undergrad. I paid for one year of grad school for the oldest. The other three borrowed for grad school….they will all have their student loans retired by their mid thirties, except for one of them. She is 35 and applying to med school now. They’re all doing what they want to do….I expect them to do okay financially.

With kids you need to plant the seeds of success early and let them grow without a lot of cultivation.

0

TexasTim65

5 years ago

Unless the job you want requires a degree (doctor, lawyer, certain engineering etc) you shouldn’t be attending a 4 year university.

2 years community college , apprenticeship programs, the military or just straight working are the way to go for 80% of the kids out there graduating high school. Somewhere along the line the lie was sold to the public that everyone needed to be 4 year university educated in order to work at a job. It’s just not true and it’s causing so many kids to waste good years of their working lives racking up huge debt loads for something they won’t ever do job wise.

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

I can agree with the spirit of your comment, but “brand” matters.

So get 2+ years outside of a 4-year university… community colleges, high-school AP classes, and such (working while you do that, if possible). Transfer all you can to the best brand you can admission-wise, then spend as little time as possible at that university finishing up your bachelors. If you can get a B.S. from a college like Stanford or Harvard or Yale or M.I.T. with just 3 semesters at that college, it’s worth it.

0

TexasTim65

5 years ago

Reply to ajc1970

Brand matters only in the ‘old boys’ network. Anywhere else you’ll find it doesn’t matter near as much as you think. I’ve interviewed people from those schools and not hired them and didn’t really care that they went there (this especially matters once you are more than a handful of years into your work career).

What going to those schools mostly does is let you mingle with other students going to those schools. Very often you’ll end up mingling with some rich old school money and if you befriend them you may get recommended / hired into a position simply because someone knows you personally. That’s the old boys network in action.

0

whirlaway

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

Exactly. The advantage of such top schools is the connections that you get. As far as the “what you know” part is concerned, it remains the same as any other decent school, at best. It is the “who you know” makes the difference.

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

My B.S. is from one of those brand schools and I’ve never been in an old boys network. My first employer hired *only* from a list of about 15 brand schools (but would hire any graduate from those schools, regardless of the major — they actually chartered planes filled with candidates from CalTech to SFO).

Maybe it’s because I’m a tech dweeb who spent the first decade+ of my career in Silicon Valley, but for me and many I’ve encountered, brand matters.

0

TexasTim65

5 years ago

Reply to ajc1970

I suspect your employer is an ‘old boys’ network even if you don’t realize it. The very fact they only hire from 15 or so schools sort of proves it. I imagine all the top guys there went to those 15 schools 🙂

I’m a tech dweeb too (80s graduate) who’s lived all over (Toronto, Dallas, Austin, East Bay Area and now Florida). I’ve seen ‘old boys’ companies similar to yours esp when I was in the East Bay area and the Silicon Valley/Stanford/Berkley preference was highly prevalent. But get outside there and it matters way less.

Ironically the quality of education isn’t really much different. I graduated from University of Waterloo (a top tech school in Canada that once was the leading supplier of S/W engineers to Microsoft in the 80s’/90s) and 20 years later took some refresher courses at Stanford plus a few Masters courses when I lived in the East Bay (03-05) and the same things were being taught at the same year/level. That’s when I realized there was fundamentally nothing different in what you receive education wise between roughly equivalent schools.

0

ajc1970

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

I’m currently attending my 7th college.

6 were no harder than high school.

1 (MIT) was fundamentally different than the others. From my personal experience and from meeting and working with other graduates, I’m willing to say that students at MIT, CMU and CalTech receive a very different education from the rest of the college students in the US.

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Reply to ajc1970

My masters degree from a top brand university did not give me connections outside my own class. For most students, this old-boys network is something of a myth–rich kids are an exception, but the network pre-existed the university. That said, other graduates of the university understood that I’d been through the same rigorous experiences, and that I deserved respect. There was no favoritism. Instead, they set high expectations that I had to meet.

What the university did give me was exposure to some of the greatest minds in the world, both as faculty and interacting with other students.

0

Captain Ahab

5 years ago

Reply to TexasTim65

This was true 40 years ago. It is not true today. Many traditional non-professional fields have accumulated knowledge and will soon require expertise/skills that will justify higher learning. The problem is the 2-year community colleges (and 4-year) have not realized this. For example, should a dental assistant be capable of critical thinking in his/her job? Should a hairdresser have some knowledge of marketing, accounting, etc? As for military programs, 40% of marine officers graduating today would not have graduated during WW2. What does this say about standards in an ever increasing technological world?

A far better question is how much should be taught in college and how much learned in the workplace?

0

Don’t Miss a Post. Subscribe now.

Troubling Debt Loads at Graduation and Useless College Degrees

Share this:

Recommended Articles

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk