This Week’s Economist Cover is About Higher Ed. But Makes Bad Assumptions

I only commented on this article.  (Several people made interesting comments.)

Higher education: Creative destruction | The Economist.

“This piece makes the same mistake most journalists make. They don’t realize that, even at many “elite” schools, it may be your grandmother’s DEGREE, but it isn’t your grandmother’s EDUCATION – and, if skills matter, it won’t be your grandfather’s salary.

In their seminal book “Academically Adrift”, Arum and Roksa show that, in America, students are reguired to study 45% less than in the 60’s, and 35% less than in 1980. Not surprisingly, their gain in critical skills is next to nothing. That gain used to be one sigma. This was independent of the university’s selectivity.

In “A Tale Out of School” on my blog, I show decision-making that directly determines the dumbing down of education in order to cater to, what David Riesman called, student “wants” at the expense of student “needs”. This has been going on since the late 70’s when Riesman and Clark Kerr tried to warn us. We weren’t ready to listen then; maybe we are now.

So, here are two mistakes that this article makes by assuming that colleges haven’t changed over the years.

First, the article starts by claiming that education has become an entitlement. No, degrees have become an entitlement, not education. (In 1980, Clark Kerr observed that the “..shift from academic merit to student consumerism is one of the two greatest reversals of direction in all the history of American higher education..” You can’t measure education by counting “degrees”.

Second, it is not only not your grandmother’s college degree, it is even moreso, not your grandmother’s high school degree. And this too, is because of the degradation of a college degree. College is where future teachers go to learn their subject. Since they don’t learn well, they can’t teach well. I believe this accounts for a large part of the pay differential between college and high school. High school has been dumbed down more than college. That’s all.

So, yes, I believe that MOOC’s (especially using Carnegie Mellons artificail intel. approach) will help. But until we find a way to guarantee capable citizens a college “education”, we will only be making changes at the edge. It is too easy to pawn off something as “education”.

(To read about how college dumbs high school, and see examples, see my blog, inside-higher-ed .)”