Communitas: For-Profit Colleges (David Halperin & Katherine Mangu-Ward)

[Bloggingheads]

[Simon Willard]

The conversation starts with David's explanation that Congress wants to insure that college programs prepare students for the job market. It's a valid concern.

However, I fear that Congress isn't up to that job. No one really knows what jobs will be in demand 10 years from now. One can only make an educated guess, if you'll pardon the pun. And what if that chemical engineering job the government promised is not there after graduation? Does the government then have the duty to hire you anyway?

There is much dynamism in Americans' career paths; I'm not doing what I was trained for, and I believe this is a common situation. It's not a bad thing, either. It brings about a lot of cross-fertilization between fields.

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by Simon Willard

The conversation starts with David's explanation that Congress wants to insure that college programs prepare students for the job market. It's a valid concern.

However, I fear that Congress isn't up to that job. No one really knows what jobs will be in demand 10 years from now. One can only make an educated guess, if you'll pardon the pun. And what if that chemical engineering job the government promised is not there after graduation? Does the government then have the duty to hire you anyway?

There is much dynamism in Americans' career paths; I'm not doing what I was trained for, and I believe this is a common situation. It's not a bad thing, either. It brings about a lot of cross-fertilization between fields.

It would be nice if the programs offered were designed to credibly educate people in the fields they choose. I have a relative taking a "software engineering" course at an big name online college. There is exactly one course left before graduation, and the only programming problem she's been asked to solve (iterated over and over again, in four different programming languages with only a small amount of increasing complexity) is a ^$&#(*^ mortgage calculator - plus some some fairly elementary HTML and a little SQL. All this over three years of classes with a bill over 50 grand.

[operative]

Originally Posted by AemJeff

It would be nice if the programs offered were designed to credibly educate people in the fields they choose. I have a relative taking a "software engineering" course at an big name online college. There is exactly one course left before graduation, and the only programming problem she's been asked to solve (iterated over and over again, in four different programming languages with only a small amount of increasing complexity) is a ^$&#(*^ mortgage calculator - plus some some fairly elementary HTML and a little SQL. All this over three years of classes with a bill over 50 grand.

Ouch. Could've gotten that at a community college for less than 10 thousand.

I think it's ludicrous for the government to try to involve itself in college curriculum. I got my undergrad from a good university, double majored and finished with close to a 4.0; I still didn't have much luck on the job market but I knew that I wasn't choosing the most job-friendly majors. That's why there's graduate school.

[qingl78]

After listening, I hope I never hear a libertarian say that the real reason for unemployment is that the people are not trained for the jobs available today because I just heard a libertarian say that not everyone should be trained for the jobs available today.

[JonIrenicus]

Originally Posted by qingl78

After listening, I hope I never hear a libertarian say that the real reason for unemployment is that the people are not trained for the jobs available today because I just heard a libertarian say that not everyone should be trained for the jobs available today.

Let's put it another way, not everyone should be trained for every job available today. I wish there was a more accurate way of forecasting the suite of career paths people would do well at.


I have a cousin that called me the other day asking how to set up his wireless router. About a half hour later I was finally able to coach him through the process. It drained me of nearly all my energy, but reminded me of something. Not everyone is good at everything. To give people like him money for say a computer science degree would be a waste for both his own future prospects, and the one who gave the money in the first place.

Not an argument to funnel NO resources his way for some pathway to a better career, but there are constraints to how far people can easily go in different areas.

The real problem is figuring out what areas we can open up to people who can't get as much benefit from some typical 4 year institution or some shoddy online course.

[sapeye]

Interesting idea about people learning to be hair dressers on the job. I'm trying to imagine Katherine dropping into her local salon, having her regular stylist say, "We have a new employee here that has no clue about cutting hair, but s/he's gotta learn somewhere. Do you mind if he/she has a whack at your head?"

[badhatharry]

Originally Posted by sapeye

Interesting idea about people learning to be hair dressers on the job. I'm trying to imagine Katherine dropping into her local salon, having her regular stylist say, "We have a new employee here that has no clue about cutting hair, but s/he's gotta learn somewhere. Do you mind if he/she has a whack at your head?"

But there must be many jobs which can be learned at the workplace. Going to a four year university to become an office manager seems pretty pointless.
That is the type of position which can be worked up to over time. On the job training instead of a big loan to pay off...that's the ticket!

[sugarkang]

David Halperin is absolutely right about equality of opportunity. And yet if he really believed that, I would think he'd be lobbying for a standardized test to get a degree in whatever. Any self directed efforts at "cost containment" are ridiculous.

Self motivated, but poor individuals should be able to study at home. If we're interested in meritocracy, I think the government could start creating equalizers in this vein.

[ohreally]

Originally Posted by sapeye

Interesting idea about people learning to be hair dressers on the job. I'm trying to imagine Katherine dropping into her local salon, having her regular stylist say, "We have a new employee here that has no clue about cutting hair, but s/he's gotta learn somewhere."

I agree that cutting hair requires professional training. But there are professions that require no training: for example, political science. (Nothing there you can't learn by reading a book during TV commercials.)

[Simon Willard]

Originally Posted by AemJeff

I have a relative taking a "software engineering" course at an big name online college. There is exactly one course left before graduation, and the only programming problem she's been asked to solve (iterated over and over again, in four different programming languages with only a small amount of increasing complexity) is a ^$&#(*^ mortgage calculator - plus some some fairly elementary HTML and a little SQL. All this over three years of classes with a bill over 50 grand.

That's pretty sad.

[operative]

Originally Posted by ohreally

I agree that cutting hair requires professional training. But there are professions that require no training: for example, political science. (Nothing there you can't learn by reading a book during TV commercials.)

You're either joking or 发狂.

[ohreally]

http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/331...6:12&out=16:21

"Why don't we outsource these decisions to banks..."

Yes, why not? That worked out great with the $8 trillion housing bubble.

And when you google "Bank of America," here's what you get: "Bank of America steals ashes of dead husband and ransacks house after foreclosure"

So yes I think they can take care of our educational needs. Good call, Mangu-Ward.

[Florian]

Originally Posted by operative

You're either joking or 发狂.

I believe ohreally was referring to the political science of Mrs. Mangu-Ward and the Cato Institute. Not the Chinese stuff.

[BornAgainDemocrat]

I question the common assumption that a modern technological society requires a better educated workforce. As a rule new technology reduces the amount of knowledge and skill required to do a job. This was true at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, when machine operators replaced skilled craftsmen, and it remains true today when computers are programmed to do all kinds of things that used to require numeracy, judgment, close attention to detail, specialized knowledge, etc. Accounting software is a perfect example, numerically controlled machine tools another. Cashiers no longer need to know how to add and subtract, clerks don't need to write legibly or type without error. An ability to read basic English is required, but beyond that not a great deal.

[ohreally]

Originally Posted by BornAgainDemocrat

I question the common assumption that a modern technological society requires a better educated workforce.

It increases the gap on the demand side between highly skilled job and menial ones: the guy who designs the ipad and the one who flips burgers. The loss of intermediate skill levels (craftsmanship and the like) is a tragedy. It means increased alienation -- or for those allergic to Marxist rhetoric, an abundance of jobs for human robots, which provide zero personal satisfaction, loss of purpose in life, etc. Germany still cultivates mid-tech skill levels with a vast of array of professional/vocational schools that churn out the best tool manufacturers in the world. So the choice need not be between Intel and Walmart.

[ohreally]

What bugs me about Libertarians is not so much their shallow, reductionist, teenage ideology, but their hypocrisy. So there you have Yalie Mangu-Ward having enjoyed a first-rate educational experience (half of which was paid for by the government -- yes, half!), telling the poor schmucks who are stuck with U. Phoenix online that art history is not for them (unless they can afford it -- except that if they could then obviously they wouldn't need to enroll at U. Phoenix).

One can discuss the "social utility" of art history, that's fine (I used to do this in high school), but the lack of self-awareness among Libertarians is galling. They listen to NPR, not Clear Channel, they get educated at the taxpayer's expense, they hold bullshit jobs where they get to pontificate endlessly about topics they know nothing about (read Wilkinson on "Happiness research" for a good laugh), but what gets them really really agitated is if the government spends money on the little guy who's trying to catch a break in life -- apparently unaware that without the government's help they'd be flipping burgers, too.

[BornAgainDemocrat]

Katherine Mangu-Ward asks if there is a shortage of people like her? The answer, of course, is yes! But that is because she possesses rare intelligence, not because she majored in political science or comparative lit. She is just the kind of person Ivy League colleges are meant to attract, and for whom a classic liberal arts education is appropriate: future members of our policy elites.

I question however whether federally subsidized student are appropriate for students like her. The Ivy League is already enormously endowed with tax-exempt contributions, at public expense, and is able to offer full financial aid to all its students in need.

On the other hand the Ivy League does a poor job of attracting student bodies that reflect the full ethnic and geographical diversity of America -- I am thinking of Scots-Irish and those of German, Irish, English, and Polish descent who live in the South and Mid-West -- for which, in view of their funding and influence in our society, they ought to feel some responsibility.

[BornAgainDemocrat]

Katherine Mangu-Ward asks if there is a shortage of people like her? The answer, of course, is yes! But that is because she possesses rare intelligence and sensitivity, not because she majored in political science or comparative literature. She is just the kind of person Ivy League colleges are designed to attract, and for whom a classic liberal arts education is entirely appropriate: future members of our governing elites.

I question however whether federally subsidized student loans are appropriate for students like Ms. Mangu-Ward. The Ivy League is endowed with tax-exempt contributions, at great public expense, and is able to offer full financial aid to all its students in need.

On the other hand the Ivy League does a rather poor job of attracting student bodies that reflect the full ethnic and geographical diversity of America. I am thinking of the Scots-Irish and persons of German, Irish, English, and Polish descent who live in the South and Mid-West. Together they compose half the citizenry and half of our soldiers overseas.

In view of the federal sources of its funding and its de facto ability to choose tomorrow's governing elites, the Ivy League ought to feel some sense of national and democratic responsibility towards these groups. But of course that's just my personal opinion and probably reflects the fact that I am one of them -- and wasn't accepted into Harvard, the only school I applied to, dumb me!

[piscivorous]

Christ, Marx, Wood and Wei led us to this perfect day

[Starwatcher162536]

So I assume this wasn't ABET credited?

[Wonderment]

I agree that cutting hair requires professional training. But there are professions that require no training: for example, political science. (Nothing there you can't learn by reading a book during TV commercials.)

The fact that cutting hair requires professional training does not mean you can't learn on the job. Apprenticeship programs can be outstanding in many fields. But we need to learn to better incentivize and/or subsidize them. (In other words, there's still a role for government).

Educational vouchers are not a bad idea for post-high school learning, but high schools also need to do a better job of teaching old-fashioned non-liberal arts trades. Community colleges also drop the ball here. Everything is bachelor-degree oriented, and CCs (at least in California) have an abysmal record at transfering students to four-year institutions.

One big problem with the failure to teach non-bachelor-degree skills either on-the-job or in school is that young people end up with two options: Mac Jobs for ever (minimum wage, low status, poverty level) or the biggest employer in the welfare state, the Military.

Displaying Yale credentials for the middle class, as both David and Katherine did, are 90% status markers and 10% skill markers (roughly). But for the working class, the military works the same way. Being a "veteran" also is a huge status booster in the context of the non-unionized, entry-level universe.

[BornAgainDemocrat]

Originally Posted by piscivorous

Christ, Marx, Wood and Wei led us to this perfect day

Who are Wood and Wei? Adam Smith also commented on it.

[ohreally]

Originally Posted by Wonderment

Displaying Yale credentials for the middle class, as both David and Katherine did, are 90% status markers and 10% skill markers (roughly). But for the working class, the military works the same way. Being a "veteran" also is a huge status booster in the context of the non-unionized, entry-level universe.

Yale is about branding and networking. A first-rate finishing school. You're right, for the little people, the military is the only status booster they can hope for. Pizza hut doesn't carry the same prestige. On the other hand, Pizza hut produces pizza you can eat, whereas the military seems only good at losing wars and eating up most of the federal budget. Since America seems intent on being on the losing side of history, perhaps its military is the perfect model.

[Starwatcher162536]

I don't understand how for profit colleges have become such a problem. I was under the impression that for a college to get government funding they had to meet the standards set forth by ABET. I've been told that getting ABET accredited isn't easy. They actually send people to sit through the classes and make sure the program is up to snuff.

I just don't see how for-profit colleges could possibly be getting away with selling crap.

Edit:
Wait a second...are we talking about trade schools?

[Starwatcher162536]

Originally Posted by ohreally

It increases the gap on the demand side between highly skilled job and menial ones: the guy who designs the ipad and the one who flips burgers. The loss of intermediate skill levels (craftsmanship and the like) is a tragedy. It means increased alienation -- or for those allergic to Marxist rhetoric, an abundance of jobs for human robots, which provide zero personal satisfaction, loss of purpose in life, etc. Germany still cultivates mid-tech skill levels with a vast of array of professional/vocational schools that churn out the best tool manufacturers in the world. So the choice need not be between Intel and Walmart.

Rings true to me. It's important to mention that above and beyond what you mention there is a crappy exchange rate. I don't have data, and I may be biased since I come looking at this from a heavy industrial background, but it seems like for every 1 highly skilled position that opens there are 5 semi-skilled positions that close.

[Starwatcher162536]

I think Katherine is right when she says that for many, especially those on the lower end economically speaking, there is no conscious weighting of the relative benefits for various majors.

~Danger Bill Robinson! Incoming anecdote! Danger Bill Robinson!~
I remember my commencement ceremony being a rather emotional event for my family. Most likely do to me being the first in the family to ever graduate HS or attend a post-secondary program. I'm a few years older then the rest in my generation and I remember my cousins being told repeatably to go to college. I dunno, it felt to me like they all had this simplistic graduate HS->go to university->succeed model in their head.

[Otto Kerner]

I was quite confused by this part of the conversation. I work for a student loan company, and my understanding has always been that no school's students can receive federally-guaranteed loans unless the school has been federally accredited. That is already in place.

Regarding Starwatcher's specific comments, my impression is that the federal accrediting is basically there to check to make sure that the school is teaching something, i.e. that it isn't a complete sham that is only pretending to be a school. I don't think they do much anything to check whether what the school teaches is useful, or whether the school misrepresents the usefulness of its degrees.

[Otto Kerner]

By the way, you have to be careful when anybody starts talking about the stats for default rates on student loans. One of the most common measures shows the percentage of loans that have defaulted two years after the borrower is supposed to start making payments. It's easy to defer payments for longer than that, so only people who aren't paying any attention at all will have defaulted that quickly.

[sapeye]

Originally Posted by ohreally

I agree that cutting hair requires professional training. But there are professions that require no training: for example, political science. (Nothing there you can't learn by reading a book during TV commercials.)

I agree, too. I think a apprenticeship program can be a really good career path. My guess is that more than half of university students don't really need to be in university programs for what they want and need to learn for what they want to do. The whole educational system is out of whack from the ground up. It's just that the thought of Katherine being used in a training session tickled my funny bone.

[Baltimoron]

Originally Posted by Wonderment

One big problem with the failure to teach non-bachelor-degree skills either on-the-job or in school is that young people end up with two options: Mac Jobs for ever (minimum wage, low status, poverty level) or the biggest employer in the welfare state, the Military.

Or, teaching English in foreign countries.

[piscivorous]

I take it your not a Ira Levin fan.

Christ, Marx, Wood, and Wei
Led us to this perfect day.
Marx, Wood, Wei, and Christ
All but Wei were sacrificed.
Wood, Wei, Christ, and Marx
Gave us lovely schools and parks.
Wei, Christ, Marx, and Wood
Made us humble, made us good.

[Starwatcher162536]

I mistakenly believed all programs that received federal funding were ABET accredited. Turns out ABET is a non-governmental (quasi more like) standards review body that only evaluates specific science programs.

An example from ABET's website (Link)

ELECTRICAL, COMPUTER,
AND SIMILARLY NAMED ENGINEERING PROGRAMS
Lead Society: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
Cooperating Society for Computer Engineering Programs: CSAB
These program criteria apply to engineering programs that include electrical, electronic, computer, or similar modifiers in their titles.
1. Curriculum
The structure of the curriculum must provide both breadth and depth across the range of engineering topics implied by the title of the program.The program must demonstrate that graduates have: knowledge of probability and statistics, including applications appropriate to the program name and objectives; and knowledge of mathematics through differential and integral calculus, basic sciences, computer science, and engineering sciences necessary to analyze and design complex electrical and electronic devices, software, and systems containing hardware and software components, as appropriate to program objectives. Programs containing the modifier “electrical” in the title must also demonstrate that graduates have a
knowledge of advanced mathematics, typically including differential equations, linear algebra, complex variables, and discrete mathematics.
Programs containing the modifier “computer” in the title must also demonstrate that graduates have a knowledge of discrete mathematics.

The above sounds a little squishy, but if the IEEE has to okay it I guess it can't be a total joke. The practicalities of how a school goes about applying and being reviewed for an ABET accreditation confuses me though. It seems like the only way to do this would be to audit the classes by having professionals sit in, just like what I was told. The problem is that in order to get licensed the NCEES requires a student to be within one year of graduating from an ABET accredited program. So in order to get students you need to be ABET accredited, but in order to get ABET accredited you must be teaching students up to ABET standards. Chicken and egg much?

...I think think one of realities first principles is that all quasi-governmental (Intersection of proper gov't and the private sector) are accompanied by guidelines and bylaws of byzantine complexity.

[badhatharry]

Originally Posted by Wonderment

The fact that cutting hair requires professional training does not mean you can't learn on the job. Apprenticeship programs can be outstanding in many fields. But we need to learn to better incentivize and/or subsidize them. (In other words, there's still a role for government).

Why isn't the prospect of getting a good job sufficient incentive? Government subsidization will only make sure that trades which aren't needed have too many applicants. Solar panel installers, anyone? The union I belonged to offered four trade apprenticship programs and they were paid for by the employers and members. They had complete control of who and how many got in. Those were the good old days when unions had an actual purpose besides extortion.

The government should step away from the economy.

[Wonderment]

I don't think they do much anything to check whether what the school teaches is useful, or whether the school misrepresents the usefulness of its degrees.

That seems to be the key. There's one infamous college of photography out here that's very expensive and promises graduates great jobs, often in Hollywood, the media or as fashion photographers (all glam fields for teenagers). Turns out something like 3% of the graduates were actually working in a photography-related job 5 yrs later.

[eeeeeeeli]

Originally Posted by ohreally

http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/331...6:12&out=16:21

"Why don't we outsource these decisions to banks..."

Yes, why not? That worked out great with the $8 trillion housing bubble.

And when you google "Bank of America," here's what you get: "Bank of America steals ashes of dead husband and ransacks house after foreclosure"

So yes I think they can take care of our educational needs. Good call, Mangu-Ward.

My life would be completely different without government loans. I've had nearly $40k for about 10 years now, as I'm just finally making enough money to start paying it down. What got me through years of career troubles, family emergencies, etc. was exactly what Halperin said: the government (we the people, society) believed in me.

Through deferments, I only ever had to pay what I could afford. I know people who got private loans and it was horrible. Banks, as businesses, only care about the bottom line. That's fine if we're not talking about people's lives. I now support a wife and two kids on my salary - which ironically, I get in part by trying to convince young screw-ups the importance of success in life.

Utopian fantasists like Mangu-Ward have such an easy time making things abstract, and ignoring the real people out in the world whose lives depend on the theories they spout. I went to city college and then state for 10 years, and met a hell of a lot of people who she would prefer to see cast to the curb because their education is too "complicated" for the government to attend to, or because they might - heaven forbid be pushing up tuition costs. My guess is she never met many of those people at Yale.

Yes - it's so much nicer when people stay in their place.

[ohreally]

Originally Posted by eeeeeeeli

Utopian fantasists like Mangu-Ward have such an easy time making things abstract, and ignoring the real people out in the world whose lives depend on the theories they spout.

Indeed, they never have to pay for the consequences of their fantasies, and when presented with facts they behave like Marxist-Leninists who always insist that the only problems with the theory is that it's not applied with enough vigor and purity. So if Bank of America behaves like scums of the earth it' s only because they suffer from too much government regulation.

My animus toward the intellectual lightweights at Reason and Cato is that their claptrap pushes the Overton window. So that now it's widely accepted that government is, by default, bad, and the only point open to negotiation is how government should be "tolerated."

Libertarianism is the ideology of the privileged, who get paid to hide selfishness behind a mask of virtue.

[AemJeff]

Originally Posted by ohreally

...

Libertarianism is the ideology of the privileged, who get paid to hide selfishness behind a mask of virtue.

Yeah.

[Unit]

Originally Posted by qingl78

After listening, I hope I never hear a libertarian say that the real reason for unemployment is that the people are not trained for the jobs available today because I just heard a libertarian say that not everyone should be trained for the jobs available today.

Definitely. If everyone were to be trained for the jobs available today there wouldn't be anyone left able to do the jobs available tomorrow.

[Unit]

Originally Posted by sapeye

Interesting idea about people learning to be hair dressers on the job. I'm trying to imagine Katherine dropping into her local salon, having her regular stylist say, "We have a new employee here that has no clue about cutting hair, but s/he's gotta learn somewhere. Do you mind if he/she has a whack at your head?"

They have fake heads with fake hair they practice on, before handling customers. How do you think the schools do it?