A very good read and very good ideas. Yes, college is ridiculously expensive.
Thought experiment… what if Universities had to co-sign on the student loans and the universities had to post their endowments as collateral? If the students graduate and don’t earn enough money from the college degree to pay off the debt in a reasonable period ( 5 or 10 years) then the University, not the taxpayer, would foot the bill.
Of course, most loans for all the amenities would probably disappear because, as you point out, they have nothing to do with education.
Interesting idea. My guess is that it would have a very different impact on elite private universities with huge endowments compared to most other universities with much smaller endowments.
Spot on. At Risk & Progress, I have a deep dive on tuition inflation that I continually update where I discussed this.
While certainly not the sole driver, govt subsidized student loans have enabled unbelievable administrative an amenity bloat in our institutions of higher education.
Magoons plan, to exclude these amenities from loans, would help. I would go further and abolish the loans entirely, preferring income sharing agreements to properly align the incentives between schools, employers, and students.
Regardless, as a culture, we need to get more comfortable with the idea that not everyone needs a college degree.
To be clear, I am not just advocating for excluding amenities from loans. I am advocating for making amenities a separate line item from tuition that students can choose to pay for or not. In my proposal, it does not matter whether a student pays for it via loan or not.
"Going to university makes a great deal of sense for youths in the Top 25% of intelligence and academic aptitude, particularly if they want to pursue a career in law, business, finance, engineering, or physical sciences. However few youths from working-class and lower-income families fit into that category."
Doesnt this show that our education system wastes a lot of resources? Shouldnt we put more effort in giving youths from working-class and lower-income families a better education?
Yes, that is absolutely true. I think it was a big mistake to try to push everyone to go to college. In this article, I have a proposal for how we can help youths from working-class and lower-income families better skills for the workforce:
A couple of comments. My daughter noted that there were a number of students from working class backgrounds in the Construction Management program in her Civil Engineering college at the University of Washington. Many were using the GI bill after their service stint. There are a number of such reasonable career pathways.
A way of reducing college expenses is to do the first two years at community colleges - preferably paid by the public schools as part of a Running Start / College in High School program. For this to work well though, the student must be both competent and diligent and needs strong and competent advising to appropriately choose courses that will transfer to the state university. And by strong and competent advising I mean looking at course grades and telling the student - you are NOT apt for these fields, but you are well suited for other fields. Now what among the fields you are suited for has a career path that you would be content? Note : This is NOT 'follow your dream' advise.
And if you live within range, you can attend a state university as a commuting student while still living at home. Mind you, you have to have worked hard enough and be competent enough to get in.
My son has a friend who did a 2 year technical college program in MS machining and then proceeded to use the money he would have spent at college to open a small specialty machine shop. He is doing very well. And a programmer associate of mine has a son who did both NC machining and welding at a technical college and last I heard was doing quite well.
A very good read and very good ideas. Yes, college is ridiculously expensive.
Thought experiment… what if Universities had to co-sign on the student loans and the universities had to post their endowments as collateral? If the students graduate and don’t earn enough money from the college degree to pay off the debt in a reasonable period ( 5 or 10 years) then the University, not the taxpayer, would foot the bill.
Of course, most loans for all the amenities would probably disappear because, as you point out, they have nothing to do with education.
Interesting idea. My guess is that it would have a very different impact on elite private universities with huge endowments compared to most other universities with much smaller endowments.
Spot on. At Risk & Progress, I have a deep dive on tuition inflation that I continually update where I discussed this.
While certainly not the sole driver, govt subsidized student loans have enabled unbelievable administrative an amenity bloat in our institutions of higher education.
Magoons plan, to exclude these amenities from loans, would help. I would go further and abolish the loans entirely, preferring income sharing agreements to properly align the incentives between schools, employers, and students.
Regardless, as a culture, we need to get more comfortable with the idea that not everyone needs a college degree.
Thanks for the comment.
To be clear, I am not just advocating for excluding amenities from loans. I am advocating for making amenities a separate line item from tuition that students can choose to pay for or not. In my proposal, it does not matter whether a student pays for it via loan or not.
"Going to university makes a great deal of sense for youths in the Top 25% of intelligence and academic aptitude, particularly if they want to pursue a career in law, business, finance, engineering, or physical sciences. However few youths from working-class and lower-income families fit into that category."
Doesnt this show that our education system wastes a lot of resources? Shouldnt we put more effort in giving youths from working-class and lower-income families a better education?
Yes, that is absolutely true. I think it was a big mistake to try to push everyone to go to college. In this article, I have a proposal for how we can help youths from working-class and lower-income families better skills for the workforce:
https://frompovertytoprogress.substack.com/p/why-we-need-more-vocational-education
A couple of comments. My daughter noted that there were a number of students from working class backgrounds in the Construction Management program in her Civil Engineering college at the University of Washington. Many were using the GI bill after their service stint. There are a number of such reasonable career pathways.
A way of reducing college expenses is to do the first two years at community colleges - preferably paid by the public schools as part of a Running Start / College in High School program. For this to work well though, the student must be both competent and diligent and needs strong and competent advising to appropriately choose courses that will transfer to the state university. And by strong and competent advising I mean looking at course grades and telling the student - you are NOT apt for these fields, but you are well suited for other fields. Now what among the fields you are suited for has a career path that you would be content? Note : This is NOT 'follow your dream' advise.
And if you live within range, you can attend a state university as a commuting student while still living at home. Mind you, you have to have worked hard enough and be competent enough to get in.
My son has a friend who did a 2 year technical college program in MS machining and then proceeded to use the money he would have spent at college to open a small specialty machine shop. He is doing very well. And a programmer associate of mine has a son who did both NC machining and welding at a technical college and last I heard was doing quite well.
Thanks for the comment and mentioning the numerous alternatives to a four-year university that currently exist.