Subsidized college, frequently misrepresented as free college, would strengthen the credentialist arms race. I know that I keep saying this, but it's remarkable how many people think that pushing credentialism even harder will solve the problems caused by credentialism.
We already have a subsidized K-12 system. What have we gotten out of it? Very little. As more and more people are acquiring high school diplomas, these diplomas are plummeting in value.
The primary reason people want "free" college is because this same idea has already failed miserably. A high school diploma is worth so little that we now treat college degrees the same way we used to treat high school diplomas. We insist that this means we need to treat college the same way as high school. I have yet to encounter anyone who has even tried to explain why treating college more like high school will produce drastically different outcomes. In particular, I have not seen any reason to believe that college subsidies would not result in credential inflation.
Currently, those who are well off have an advantage. They can more easily justify the cost to acquire a college degree. They can more easily invest the time, money, and every required to obtain more impressive credentials.
One of the arguments for subsidizing college is to take away the financial obstacles to a college degree that low-income families face. Money is one of only three types of investments required for schooling success. Low-income families have tougher lives, and finding the necessary time and effort will still be more difficult for these families.
Of course, subsidizing college wouldn't eliminate financial concerns. It's much easier to forgo an income if you are already well off. Beyond that, the subsidies people want wouldn't cover advanced degrees or degrees from more prestigious institutions. Those who start with money would still have the advantage when it comes to credential attainment.
On top of all of that, we should also acknowledge the impact on the cost of living. There are multiple ways to subsidize college, but they would likely all see expenses passed on to average citizens. This can result in an increase in the cost of living. If you're rich, this isn't a big deal. If you're struggling, the added cost might be too much for you to handle.
Everything that I have stated should be obvious. As I have already mentioned, we are already doing all of these things but at a different level. Just look at our K-12 system. This has been a disaster for economic mobility. There is no reason to believe that doing the same at the collegiate level will provide the exact opposite results. Expect credential inflation to kick in, drastically reducing the value of college degrees.
Rich families have had no problems exploiting the collegiate system. This allows them to obtain opportunity through the acquisition of credentials rather than having to work their way to success. Essentially, they have been able to buy success through the collegiate model.
Subsidizing college won't change this. Most degrees will see their value diminished. The people who benefit the most will be able to buy more expensive degrees. More expensive degrees will help them stand out. This also means that the cost to stand out on the basis of credentials will increase, putting the best opportunities further out of the reach for low-income families.
The rich would benefit more from subsidized college than those who are struggling. This is because this concept strengthens the idea that we are evaluated more based on credentials acquired than what we have to offer. There are others who will benefit. This includes professors and their unions. This is already a position with far too much influence. More time in the system means even more influence.
Some with limited means might be able to get a degree that they couldn't before, but the value of that degree will be worth far less than it is today. Some students have already found a way to attend college. That value will decrease for those students. In some cases, the diminished value of college degrees could even convince some people that college simply isn't worth it. Additionally, those who still don't go to college, which will disproportionately be from low-income families, will have even fewer options. Some of the few remaining jobs that don't require a college degree will stop accepting applicants who lack that piece of paper.
The rich would do well. The poor would be screwed over. Subsidizing college is a horrible idea that will further inhibit economic mobility. Personally, I would rather fix our mistakes than strengthen them. We need to move away from the flawed and inequitable concept of credentialism. We need to ensure there are alternative pathways to success.
People who pursue an education outside the confines of a restrictive schooling environment, some of them highly capable, should not be deprived of opportunity just because they didn't acquire pieces of paper. We need to stop slamming doors shut on good people. We need to stop putting the value of paper above the value of people.
No comments:
Post a Comment