Too many people going to college

With an article in today's NY Times titled What's the Return on Education?, I was hoping for a meaty examination of the issues, but instead it's all fluff.

So here is the much better Half Sigma explanation. First of all, we know that people with more years of post-secondary education have higher average salaries. But why? Here are the four factors that contribute:

(1) College students have higher IQs than non-college students. The SAT, which is basically an IQ test, is used to select people who are suitable for college study. The book The Bell Curve explained that IQ is positively correlated with income independent of education.

(2) College students come from wealthier families than non-college students. Wealthier families provide their children with industry contacts and other advatanges that help them earn more money independent of their degree.

(3) Credentialism: employers value the credential of the degree even though the degree holder doesn't have any job skills that the non-degree holder doesn't possess. Somem industries, such as law, are regulated so that only those with the credential are allowed to practice. Education for the sake of the credential imposes an externality on society. The person with the degree is getting a job opportunity over an equally qualified non-degree holder. Normally, the best public policy is to discourage activities with externalities, but U.S. policy of encouraging education is doing the opposite and thus making a bad situation worse.

(4) Students might actually be learning job skills that they wouldn't have otherwise been able to learn if they were not in college. This primarily applies to more vocational courses of study such as nursing or engineering.

I think that the economists in the NY Times article are ignoring factors (1) and (2), especially factor (1) because it's politically incorrect.

My conclusion is that America is overeducating its youth, and we should cut down on the number of people attending college. A good start in this direction would be for the government to stop funding higher education and to cut out the student loan program.

Comments

[nobody]

Overeducating? I seriously doubt this. More likely, we are undereducating our youth. There is rampant grade inflation in colleges. This effective "deflates" the value of college education.

The problem America faces is that college education no longer offers the same level of competitiveness in the job market. We can now outsources white collars jobs just as easy as blue collars jobs. Just look at Microsft and Intel. They exported good paying R&D jobs to their facilities in India and China. This trend is extending to accounting and law as well.

[christy]

I totally agree, and the grade inflation is partly due to the fact that too many are attending college. It has to be dumbed down in order to hand out degrees. I was trying to look for chem courses I could take to satisfy the patent bar requirements at my huge state university, and outside of the plentiful chem for dummies classes there were slim pickings.

[Michael A. Clem]

While I agree with the recommendations, which is essentially to get government out of higher ed, I don't think we're overeducating them. Overeducation simply isn't possible unless someone is deliberately shooting for a low-end job.
Maybe some of those burger flippers with college degrees will start using their brains and figure out how to make their own job and increase productivity in our economy, too, instead of just hoping somebody will give them a job.

[pierre]

i'm not sure that we're over-educating so much as we are not educating in the right direction.

people constantly complain that we don't have enough science/math students, phd's etc. but have you ever heard anyone complain that we don't have enough liberal arts majors. we've got tons and tons of history majors, english majors and yes, education majors (education major is my personal favorite - these people are the smartest of all - they end up with bloated salaries in education administration doing the 9-5 routine with not liability and little or no chance of ever being fired, unless they use the "n" word --WOW).

the government should apply tax policy to education. if you want more of something, tax it less. if you want less of something, tax it more. so, they could continue giving student loans for science and math majors and cut them out for liberal arts majors (unless of course they are minorities - we still need many more minority history majors so they can tell the plight of their peoples in historical context).

[gmanedit]

Could we separate education from credentialing? A liberal arts education produces critical thinkers with a store of things to think about. We need much more education. Jobs is a separate issue.

[nobody]

There is very little demand for independent thinker these days for good reasons. They tend to be troublemakers, non-team players, and generally tend to chanllenge authority. Given these traits, why should any employer hiring them?

Joking aside, our higher education is is doing a lousy job on both fronts. They can't really produce ready-to-go employees for whatever industry the students trained for. New grads usually require significant retraining at the job. They also failed to consistently produce indenpendent thinkers who knows perception is not reality.

The interesting thing about the economics of higher education is that the job market has clearly indicated that they don't value liberal arts education. These folks tend to have lower starting salaries compared to engineering, accounting, and other specialized field. Yet, we have no shortage of people who are willing pay big bucks for it. So, maybe halfsigma is correct. A education market without govt intervention would more readily correct this inefficiency.

I agree. WAY too many overprivileged punks like yourself have been to college or more. Instead of gutting student loan programs (which, lets face it, are a drop in the bucket of most tuition costs), lets eliminate high-paying professional programs and elite state universities.

[Dan Morgan]

I generally agree with your assessment that too many are going to college. IQ is more of a determiner of income than college. It would be great if someone did a study of the impact on incomes due to college while correcting for IQ. This is one more example of where keeping the topic of IQ taboo alters our conclusions about the facts of the world around us.

[Robert Talbert]

Our culture has bought, deeply, into the notion that college is part of the American dream, and that every child in this country deserves to and ought to go to college. Consequently we have entire programs designed by the federal and state governments and organized around the principle of "access" -- making sure it is easy as possible for every student to go to college, and if possible to *ensure* that every student goes to college.

The problem here is that, first of all, college is not necessary to have a satisfying and fulfilling life. And second of all, working toward some notion of universal access without taking prerequisite skills into account is bound to lead to overpopulation of colleges by students for whom college is not the best choice.

So I think one very simple way to remedy this situation is for colleges and universities to reassert themselves on the issue of academic preparation. That is, require that any students admitted into the college or university demonstrate that they have a mastery of academic skills -- critical reading, composition, math skills, etc. -- that are known to correlate positively with success in college, and then stick to those standards. And let those who go on about "access" change their tune to say, yes, we want every person *who is prepared for college* to have access to college. But not just anybody.

Of course holding to strict academic standards is going to be viewed as elitist or racist or whatnot, so this is just more or less wishful thinking. And I think many colleges have become so dependent on tuition revenues that the thought of actually *turning down* a willing student on the basis of poor academic performance is tantamount to throwing money out the window.

[Wulf]

Sooo.... what can be done? Assume for the sake of argument that Half Sigma is right. What do you do? The universities have no incentive whatsoever to cut back on the number of students they serve (overall - if one university cuts back, others take in the extra). It's supply and demand. So how do you cut back the demand? Kids are taught for 13 years that if you don't go to college you will live behind the 7-11 and die alone.

I agree that too much value is placed on a college education. This is done by students, parents, schools (all levels), employers, government. But what can really be done?

we know that people with more years of post-secondary education have higher average salaries. But why?

5) Because a college education used to be rare. People who got it were somehow distinguishing themselves by their discipline, effort, brains, etc.

If those studies aren't adjusted for age/era of schooling, then you won't see that the relationship is merely correlative rather than causative. As Thomas Sowell points out, we know that people who have taken more plane flights have higher average salaries. But why? It ain't BECAUSE of the plane flight.

For all of those arguing that a liberal arts education does X,Y,Z, yes, and it's entirely achieveable without going to college at all and reading instead.

Cutting back on student loans is a good first step. Without it, states have no incentive to provide more bang for the buck of their college education. Without it, students have no incentive to only go to school if they are intellectually interested in attending.

Kids might be taught that they need 13 years of school or they die alone at the 7-11, but going to work before going to college would help 90% of them at living.

[curiousgryl]

Too many people in college? Perhaps. But cut governemtn funding? asisnine.

There aren't too many smart poor people in college, there are too many apathetic rich kids. End grade inflation, ramapat cheating and general instrumentalism of private and elite public education. Reward genuine intellectual curiosity.

/rant

[Half Sigma]

"There aren't too many smart poor people in college, there are too many apathetic rich kids."

As long as rich parents are paying their full way for the kids, who cares? Rich people will always waste their money on something, at least it's being spent in the United States.

[Half Sigma]

"5) Because a college education used to be rare. People who got it were somehow distinguishing themselves by their discipline, effort, brains, etc."

Now the above is just a statement that in the old days, the credential from was worth more because it was rarer.

It should be noted that the old days were quite a long time ago. College enrollment has been at high levels for decades.

[jenny stenson]

ok, I propose a solution to a saturated college educated society. Change the curriculum and don't hand out liberal art degrees, anymore. In turn, you have more students pursuing engineering and science degrees, which we need anyways, and you make degrees what it once was rare, and highly sought after by employers. The government should cut loan programs geared towards liberal arts majors!!!

My fresh perspective, hope this helps.

Merry Christmas everyone.

[Pat Stern]

Many seniors in highschool see college as the next big step. It is like training wheels on a bike. Without college, young adults would have to worry about real problems like rent and a real job with health insurence. College is a way of letting them experiance real life, but through the safty of a cage so to speak. Legally they are adults, but not mentally. So yes too many people are overrating a college education. I guess college is the new high school. Grad school is now for the smart and elite.
As far as governmanet funding being cut off, that is not the answer. Quite frankly what is the problem of dumb kids wasting time and money? There choice and all that crap. My only complaint is that schools shouldn't compromise education so johnny retarted can learn like the rest of us and get a degree. Cutting off government funding would seem to be an act to keep the rich rich and the poor poor and stupid.

"I guess college is the new high school. Grad school is now for the smart and elite."

Well then, I guess that makes me, a high school senior with no intention of going to college, equivelent to a dropout, huh?

If wealth and intelligence are as closely linked as you seem to believe, raising admissions (and financial aid) standards would present no great obstacle to your rich "ubermensch"; if, on the other hand, the correlation is not perfect, your proposal becomes another instance of the "externalization" you claim to oppose, by making money, rather than intelligence, the requirement for higher education.

College should be an option only for those with an IQ over 145 and/or SAT scores in the mid-700's and higher -- that is, those who can actually use the education productively instead of wasting time and money.

[Noe]

(I would like to apologize in advance, my apostrphe key is broken. The poor grammar to follow is a keyboard error, not a lack of understanding of the english language)
We arent educating, period... college is no longer geared towards intelligent or thoughtful people, it like most other (pre-college) schools are geared towards the lowest common denominator. "No Child Left Behind" has come to mean, lets make the smart kids stupid, that way the stupid kids dont feel stupid. Instead of working with the children who need help, schools simply hold the others back. Colleges require you to take English 101, and Study Skills Classes (yes, freshman at some colleges are required to take a class on HOW to study)... If a student enters into a college with a 30 on the ACT they are put in the classes next to those with a 12... All this achieves is frustrating the more advanced student. Frustrated students give up, they dont think its worth the effort anymore, cuz their efforts arent recognized. The kids who graduate are the A students who handed in every assignment (things like "color the spleen" or "What i did this summer" and my favorite "What I would do if I were president") They recieved an "A" for effort... But somewhere, in the dust of stupidity, are the kids who could change the world, if they could just stay awake through "THIS is a noun" or "5x1=5"... for 4 consecutive years...

Yes, let's destroy the only chance some poor scholars may have by eliminating government funding and student loans. Indeed, let the plains of academia forever the playground of the rich. The poor don't deserve a chance.

Thank God the best (private) universities and colleges grant largely need-based aid.

Don't worry about over educating the nation's youth-- most probably won't graduate anyway. The ones that do will only find a pathetic job by virtue of their mediocrity. Likewise, those that "deserve" wealth, will have it.