They are better than Harvard at structuring their model around working adults. I have 30 and 40 something colleagues who graduated debt free because their employer sponsored them through an apprenticeship like process where they learned on the job skills in the workplace 3 days a week and then academic courses 2 days across a full time job schedule for 4 years. They didn’t need to pay up front 200k for adult sleep away camp.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not surprising, too many bullshit colleges costing $$$

So what is a “bullshit” college? Just curious. Some of these lower tier colleges have the most social mobility. I highly recommend this podcast: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/what-exactly-is-college-for/ It might change your view on the value of lower tier colleges.

If you have nothing and go to school and now gave something, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the education was rigorous or that your “something” is more than subsistence. I’m not denigrating these schools, but let’s not pretend that they’re better than Harvard because Harvard’s students started school with more money.

Are the only two choices "bullshit" and "Harvard"?

What makes Harvard so great? I'm more impressed by schools that provide an education and social mobility -- what's the evidence of the value add of the elite schools?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not surprising, too many bullshit colleges costing $$$

So what is a “bullshit” college? Just curious. Some of these lower tier colleges have the most social mobility. I highly recommend this podcast: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/what-exactly-is-college-for/ It might change your view on the value of lower tier colleges.

If you have nothing and go to school and now gave something, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the education was rigorous or that your “something” is more than subsistence. I’m not denigrating these schools, but let’s not pretend that they’re better than Harvard because Harvard’s students started school with more money.

Anonymous wrote:Not surprising, too many bullshit colleges costing $$$

So what is a “bullshit” college? Just curious. Some of these lower tier colleges have the most social mobility. I highly recommend this podcast: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/what-exactly-is-college-for/ It might change your view on the value of lower tier colleges.

The gouging that colleges do needs to be clawed back. It’s criminal what they do to young people with their racket. Starting lives deep in debt. Shows how socialists are even greedier and less caring than heartless corporations. With technology, advanced education costs should be plummeting but noooooo… that must be stymied.

Anonymous wrote:Not surprising, too many bullshit colleges costing $$$

Amen!

Not surprising, too many bullshit colleges costing $$$

This has been on the radar of colleges for 15 years. The 2008 recession and general societal uncertainties of the past 10 years may have exacerbated the problem, but we've known it was coming. I think the additional option of virtual courses and degrees will also increase the pressure on small schools.

But seriously - many of these colleges that have closed recently were under 500 students enrolled. That's basically like a small private HS. Headlines are written to look dramatic (100s of Colleges threatened to CLOSE soon!!!!) But the actual impact on higher education isn't as dire. Yes, there are going to be fewer students. Yes, colleges and universities are going to have to adjust offerings as societal needs and wants change. But that is the basic economics of a capitalistic system. I don't see that this is some sort of crisis, but it certainly is buyer beware for students.

And for information - the current US population pyramid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
Baby boom peak is at 60 years old. Echo boom peak (Millennials) is at 30 years old. While there is a dip after 2008/9 in children born, I think the bigger issue is the population drop-off right now for ages 5 and under. That is Millennials delaying or foregoing having children completely (for various reasons). This is going to have a bigger ripple effect economically than just college enrollment, and I think it is overlooked right now in economic circles.

Yikes. I am all for higher ed, but I think too many who are looking for more vocational training are pushed tiwards college. Maybe there will be more diversity in institutions coming out of thus, even though there may be fewer overall.

We’re going in circles. It used to be that the academically smart went to college and the hands-on went to vocational school. Then, we told everyone they needed a college education. Lots of hands-on folks started at college (many at ridiculously-priced, for-profit mills), didn’t finish, and/or generated huge debts. Most of them got basic jobs and some even went back to trade school. Now, marginal colleges are becoming trade schools. Can’t we just agree that people are good at different things and provide schooling for both? A kid from a regional college with a vocational degree is tricking no one that he/she is academic college material.

Really interesting article. Thanks for sharing.

I actually agree with some colleges leaning more vocational. I think it would encourage smarter kids to go into needed vocations (CNC programming, manufacturing, HVAC, radiology, etc). If kids could earn a tech degree in something useful, coupled with a four year degree, that would appeal to many. Even if you like the work you're trained for, I think that the BS/BA degree is helpful if you want to move into management someday, or go to grad school for something different down the road.

Anonymous wrote:Here are some interesting highlights:

1) birth rates have plummeted since the Great Recession and continue to decline. That decade+ trend is going to soon hit college enrollment hard.
2) selective colleges will be fine, but many regional and community colleges, particularly in the northeast, Midwest, and rural areas will find it difficult to survive.
3) to survive, less selective colleges will become even more vocational, thereby increasing the knowledge and future opportunity gap between such schools and selective ones.
4) less selective colleges will use tuition discounts and slots on sports teams to lure more kids.
4) vocationalization will also impact rural vs. urban politics, as students from more selective schools tend to migrate toward larger cities and the coasts.

This seems like a good result, there are not enough vocational programs in the US currently.

Here are some interesting highlights:

1) birth rates have plummeted since the Great Recession and continue to decline. That decade+ trend is going to soon hit college enrollment hard.
2) selective colleges will be fine, but many regional and community colleges, particularly in the northeast, Midwest, and rural areas will find it difficult to survive.
3) to survive, less selective colleges will become even more vocational, thereby increasing the knowledge and future opportunity gap between such schools and selective ones.
4) less selective colleges will use tuition discounts and slots on sports teams to lure more kids.
4) vocationalization will also impact rural vs. urban politics, as students from more selective schools tend to migrate toward larger cities and the coasts.

Have we discussed this one yet? Just stumbled on it and yikes. I’d heard about the potential failing of smaller institutions but never considered the political ramifications.

https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/23428166/college-enrollment-population-education-crash?fbclid=IwAR3wIJe8CB7S0Qhb6uaGsVqd321UHgB4-FaBKi8lh1wLnjkJtEd-p8Uv5JI