Ron Johnson: Students Graduating Late because "College is Fun" (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 06:41:42 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  Congressional Elections (Moderators: Brittain33, GeorgiaModerate, Gass3268, Virginiá, Gracile)
  Ron Johnson: Students Graduating Late because "College is Fun" (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Ron Johnson: Students Graduating Late because "College is Fun"  (Read 2094 times)
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,424
« on: April 24, 2015, 11:44:21 AM »

Does it really take five to six years to complete a four year degree?

Not really.  Nevertheless, many take longer than four years.  According to the National Center for Education Statistics, about 40% of students graduate within four years and about 60% of students graduate within six years.  The distribution isn't a Gaussian function.  It is more common for students to take four years to graduate than it is for them to take six years.  Yet the average duration is about six years.

Also, I don't think anything that Johnson said was bizarre or inaccurate.  From the point of view of a student, being in school is attractive compared to being finished and being pressured to seek gainful employment.  I know I certainly felt that way as a student.  I avoided the problem by going to graduate school, but extending one's undergraduate career is another option. 

Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,424
« Reply #1 on: April 24, 2015, 02:53:11 PM »

Jim Murphy spent 9 years at Strathclyde and still didn't get a degree.

(I know it's not especially relevant, but I enjoy this fact)

I've read some conflicting data about this sort of thing, but here's a datum from a fairly reliable source:  Apparently 29% of students who start a four-year university degree don't finish (or don't finish within ten years of a study) according to the US Department of Education. 

If we add that 29% to the 59% or so mentioned above, that means that 88 percent are either finishing within six years or not finishing at all, therefore 12 percent require more than six years.  Murphy might be part of the 29% who don't finish, or, if he eventually finishes, he'll be among the 12 percent who eventually finished but took longer than six years.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,424
« Reply #2 on: April 24, 2015, 06:03:06 PM »

Regardless, Johnson's point about student loans is a compelling one that deserves more attention.

Johnson's point, indeed.  Ron Paul has been making that point for at least eleven years.  I've spoken with him personally about this on two occasions.  There are very few sectors of the economy in which the costs have risen faster than medical services.  Higher education is one of them.  Universities have every incentive to keep raising tuition as long as they know that the students that they're trying to recruit can come by the money easily and cheaply simply by asking the federal government for it.  Meanwhile, high school guidance councilors are advising any student who scores higher than a D in high school chemistry to attend a university and major in mathematics, science, or, if they are really into it, engineering, and you have the perfect recipe for a bloated system.  Combine that with a state legislature which year after year decreases state funding to the public university system, or keeps it flat, and you have a perfectly unsustainable situation.  Easy money from Uncle Sam keeps universities recruiting even from the bottom of the barrel, dwindling funds from the state keeps tuitions rising, cash-strapped, lower-class families faithful to the future economic opportunities keep borrowing low-interest money, grade inflation keeps just enough of them passing from year to year to keep administrators happy, and voila:  a generation of college graduates neither prepared to meet the challenges of a global economy and a state university system so dependent on expansion and recruitment of any and all prospective students that six-year plans becomes the norm.  After all, who wants to look for a job when you have talked to scores of people who have graduated and can't find any (either because they lack the skills or because the jobs they had imagined when their guidance councilors talked them into going to university don't exist), and who wants the students to graduate in four years when you can milk the federal government out of six years worth of tuition payments?  Let's make it seven.  Or eight.  After all, if you can sell a box of widgets, then you should try to sell a hundred boxes, or a thousand.  It's the American way.
Logged
angus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,424
« Reply #3 on: April 25, 2015, 11:55:21 AM »

Wouldn't the easiest thing to do would be to cap fees? Here they are capped at £9,000 a year. (Still a ridiculous price that hopefully will be reduced next parliament, but still)

The governor has proposed an 11% increase in funding for state universities in exchange for a tuition freeze.  Some universities would take it because they're better off with the state's funds, especially those small ones in rural areas.  Others have performed market analyses and feel that they're better off increasing tuition and declining the funding, especially those in larger markets.  

Of course this is just a governor's proposed budget.  His party is in the minority in both chambers of the state legislature so he'd probably have to agree to a bunch of other stuff that might not taste good to him in order to get that concession.

Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 12 queries.