4 ms·

I'm sympathetic to the author's frustration, but I didn't find the article compelling. He asks the question, "What is the primary advantage of college compared

I'm sympathetic to the author's frustration, but I didn't find the article compelling. He asks the question, "What is the primary advantage of college compared to other education businesses?" It's an excellent question. But then he goes off the rails into conspiracy-theory land, saying that the advantage is "marketing." Marketing is the bogeyman of everything popular that subgroups don't like. Why is Windows more popular than OS/2? Marketing! Why does this game I hate sell better than that game I love? Marketing! It's a lazy way to ignore the other products' real advantages. People who trot it out as an excuse often think "marketing" just means "advertising." In this case, I think the author is missing the fundamental advantage of college over other educational offerings: signaling. A degree, especially a degree from a prestigious university, is a signal to employers. It's a way of standing out from the crowd. Unfortunately, the crowd is now going to college, so it's harder to stand out. But you still need the degree to compete in most cases. The solution to this isn't to fight "fradulent marketing," it's to come up with better signals. I don't know how, and it's a big fight. But at least it would be fighting something that exists, not a conspiracy theory.

randomdata 4y ago
> But you still need the degree to compete in most cases. But who wants to compete in the first place? Those of us in the tech industry know better than anyone that the path that is beneficial is one where employers struggle to hire. Compensation and benefits rise where employers have to compete for talent, not where talent has to compete for jobs. Fortune favours those who are able to offer something that isn't copied a many times over; where competition is nowhere to be found. Certainly that does make it easy for us in tech to sit in our ivory towers that lack degrees hanging on the wall and scoff at those flipping burgers at McDonalds who perhaps really did need a degree to win the spot, but there's something wrong if you have to burden the opportunity cost that equates to near one million dollars in a lifetime to secure a precarious minimum wage position. That needs to be scrutinized, not emboldened with additional government supports. Whether or not the marketing was intended to be fraudulent, it is certain that colleges have benefitted from the commonly held, but mistaken, belief that a degree will increase one's income. That notion is what students use to justify the high cost of college, seeing it as a long term investment that will pay dividends later. In fairness, it was a reasonable prediction at the time it was first asserted given the limited information available, but now that we have more data it is abundantly clear that incomes have remained stagnant. The promise of higher incomes did not materialize and colleges are more than happy to sweep that under the rug.
- musicale 4y ago
  The cost of college also drastically increased, greatly outpacing inflation for half a century or more, further altering the financial proposition.
musicale 4y ago
> signaling One might even call it "credentialing." The idea of credentialing seems to make some sense (this person is declared to be [minimally] qualified for some job/position, or at least able to read/write/do basic math), but credentialing organizations tend to act like cartels. Another advantage colleges provide is networking, including classmates, alumni, recruiting networks, etc..

randomdata 4y ago

> But you still need the degree to compete in most cases. But who wants to compete in the first place? Those of us in the tech industry know better than anyone that the path that is beneficial is one where employers struggle to hire. Compensation and benefits rise where employers have to compete for talent, not where talent has to compete for jobs. Fortune favours those who are able to offer something that isn't copied a many times over; where competition is nowhere to be found. Certainly that does make it easy for us in tech to sit in our ivory towers that lack degrees hanging on the wall and scoff at those flipping burgers at McDonalds who perhaps really did need a degree to win the spot, but there's something wrong if you have to burden the opportunity cost that equates to near one million dollars in a lifetime to secure a precarious minimum wage position. That needs to be scrutinized, not emboldened with additional government supports. Whether or not the marketing was intended to be fraudulent, it is certain that colleges have benefitted from the commonly held, but mistaken, belief that a degree will increase one's income. That notion is what students use to justify the high cost of college, seeing it as a long term investment that will pay dividends later. In fairness, it was a reasonable prediction at the time it was first asserted given the limited information available, but now that we have more data it is abundantly clear that incomes have remained stagnant. The promise of higher incomes did not materialize and colleges are more than happy to sweep that under the rug.

musicale 4y ago
The cost of college also drastically increased, greatly outpacing inflation for half a century or more, further altering the financial proposition.

musicale 4y ago

> signaling One might even call it "credentialing." The idea of credentialing seems to make some sense (this person is declared to be [minimally] qualified for some job/position, or at least able to read/write/do basic math), but credentialing organizations tend to act like cartels. Another advantage colleges provide is networking, including classmates, alumni, recruiting networks, etc..