How American Higher Ed Became So Dysfuncational

Here's a little history on the American higher education system. While far from comprehensive, this gives insight into how this industry got to where it is today. Full disclosure, this post has been adapted from a paper I presented two years ago.

Beginning in the 1980’s, a shift began in higher education that pushed colleges and universities to pursue revenue and thus a more commercial business model (Martin 839). With this model came similar approaches to reflecting upon issues of success and “value-addedness” or ”any business activity should accrue to the bottom line and produce a net gain” (Pagano 289). There came a greater need to demonstrate success upon graduation, pushing institutions to promote more specialized programs that offer a greater likelihood of employment. Subsequently, “[academics] would join a long line of professionals – doctors, lawyers, politicians – whose technical self-interest meant that their authority could not be trusted” (Martin 840). No longer can the high-school graduate or transfer student study purely what interests them with a leap of faith that success will follow – or that you have the agency to define your own success – instead institutions of higher learning must put their attention and resources towards demonstrating their ”value-addedness”.

This same pressure influenced what goes on outside of the classroom as well. As the population of college-age people decreased, colleges and universities began competing for students by pumping money into student services and resources. Believe it or not, there was a time when your college didn't have a counseling center, fitness center, and the cafeteria served fresh-from-the-can gruel. To attract better students (better being more athletic, better test scores, and/or more affluent), institutions began investing in their student services and physical plant, not to improve the curriculum, but to attract more and better students. This competition fed into itself and the consequence is the bulk of students' tuition going towards higher quality dorms, vegan salad bars, and school-run off-campus activities. As a result, the cost of a college education has skyrocketed.

*c/o College Board http://bit.ly/2hlvQIK

More recently, the federal government took significant strides towards its own business approach to data collection and assessment, attempting to illustrate the value of transparency, participation, and collaboration towards continuous improvement (Bertot, Choi 7). As of September 2015, the federal government took this initiative to a new level with the launch of the federal government’s College Scorecard. Consequently, this put the onus for graduates’ success – defined by employment rates and average income – on the shoulders of Title IV institutions (those that can accept student loan funding). This is true regardless of student achievement, skill set, or socioeconomic circumstances upon admission. Furthermore, the federal government rates institutions based on whether students are employed in their area of study. In other words, greater emphasis is placed on programs that result in jobs, on students who are more likely to get said jobs, and less on developing the essential skills necessary to be successful regardless of your place or type of employment, e.g., critical thinking, analytical skills, reflective empathy, etc.

In sum, the seeds of today were planted decades ago, primarily in the early 1980's. The commodification of education resulted in an industry that is more exclusive, less affordable, and frankly, less valuable. Standards and regulations set forth by the federal government perpetuate this by emphasizing disciplines that result in employment rather than intellectual satisfaction. While these institutions should be held to task to prove what value they bring for the dollars they charge, I argue that the method by which they have to will only compound the problem and further undermine the very nature of education.

References

Bertot, John Carlo, and Heeyoon Choi. "Big Data and E-government." Proceedings of the 14th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research - Dg.o '13 (2013): n. pag. Web.

Martin, Randy. "Academic Activism." Pmla 124.3 (2009): 838-46. Web.

Pagano, Neil. "An Inter-Institutional Model for College Writing Assessment." College Composition and Communication 60.2 (2008): 285-320. JSTOR. Web. 05 Oct. 2015.