4 ms·

>Whose fault is that? They didn't read what they're signing for? Isn't that their own damn fault? [...] No one forced them to go to college Yes, but it was an

by zeteo 13y ago

>Whose fault is that? They didn't read what they're signing for? Isn't that their own damn fault? [...] No one forced them to go to college Yes, but it was an offer they couldn't refuse. One of my favorite results from game theory is that sometimes more options lead to everyone being worse off. Let me explain. Suppose in scenario A only the very wealthy or the very smart and dedicated (scholarships) have the option to go to college. Most of the workforce will not have a bachelor's. The employers will require such a degree only for those jobs where it's strictly needed, and make do with training programs etc. In scenario B, everyone has the option to go to college on expensive loans. Some people take this option. It turns out before long that employers prefer to hire these people, even in fields completely different from their major, for reasons such as: 1) finishing college becomes a signal of reliability and competence instead of wealth 2) people who need to pay off college debt will quit less readily. Before long, the college graduates' obvious advantage in the labor market pushes everyone else to try and attend college, which further drives up costs and loans. This only accentuates factors 1) and 2) above, e.g. with strong pressure to attend college and possibility to do so, it means you're either lazy or not that bright if you don't. And so we reach a situation in which only 27% of working college graduates have a job related their major [1], 35% work in a job that requires any college degree (which clearly indicates the degree is only used as a signal), and 38% are screwed up by paying their loans from jobs that only need high school or less. [1] http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/20/only-27-percent-of-college-grads-have-a-job-related-to-their-major/ http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/20/o...

ScottWhigham 13y ago
Yes, but it was an offer they couldn't refuse. Not quite that simple - students have tons of choices. They could choose a school with a lower tuition. They could stay in-state so as to avoid the much more "out of state tuition". They could opt for a degree with a higher chance of getting a job. They could opt for a degree with a higher average salary. They could work full-time to pay off the loans while they go to school (as my wife did). They could live with their parents instead of paying rent/dorm.
- zeteo 13y ago
  That would be fine and dandy, except employers discriminate against lower-tuition schools and even those are getting more expensive each year.
  - enraged_camel 13y ago
    This is absolutely true. Graduating from a top tier (most of the time that means private) school will give the person a tremendous amount of leverage in their job search, and greatly increase their chances of landing a high-paying job. What that means is that telling the students to "just go to a lower-tuition school" simply perpetuates the current class system and undermines social mobility.
    - L_Rahman 13y ago
      It's not just job search. One of the things I've discovered in the process of interviews + networking in the consulting and finance industries is that the graduates from the elite schools are their own tribe. We all seek each other out when we're starting out and that provides an invaluable personal network to start off and grow with. I feel bad for the few people I see who aren't from the feeder private Ivy League tier schools because they have to start from nothing and even if they're successful they'll constantly face barriers.
    - JonFish85 13y ago
      I'll call shenanigans on that (at least in my experience). In this area (Boston), in my experience, there are 2 tiers of schools: elite and "the rest". Harvard, MIT, Stanford, etc. are all "elite" schools and move you to the top of the pile probably. Beyond that, the school is in the "and the rest" category, and you have to dig a bit deeper: GPA, jobs, specific interests, etc. "Undermining social mobility" because not every student can afford to go to a Stanford/MIT/Harvard $50k/yr school is.... a stretch. Sure, if every not-rich student was forced to go to University of Phoenix or a "school" of that ilk, maybe I'd buy it. State schools aren't really discriminated against that much (UMass has a great reputation (engineering/CS wise at least), U of Rhode Island, U of New Hampshire, as do the California state schools and I'm sure many, many others).

by zeteo 13y ago

ScottWhigham 13y ago

Yes, but it was an offer they couldn't refuse. Not quite that simple - students have tons of choices. They could choose a school with a lower tuition. They could stay in-state so as to avoid the much more "out of state tuition". They could opt for a degree with a higher chance of getting a job. They could opt for a degree with a higher average salary. They could work full-time to pay off the loans while they go to school (as my wife did). They could live with their parents instead of paying rent/dorm.

zeteo 13y ago
That would be fine and dandy, except employers discriminate against lower-tuition schools and even those are getting more expensive each year.
- enraged_camel 13y ago
  This is absolutely true. Graduating from a top tier (most of the time that means private) school will give the person a tremendous amount of leverage in their job search, and greatly increase their chances of landing a high-paying job. What that means is that telling the students to "just go to a lower-tuition school" simply perpetuates the current class system and undermines social mobility.
  - L_Rahman 13y ago
    It's not just job search. One of the things I've discovered in the process of interviews + networking in the consulting and finance industries is that the graduates from the elite schools are their own tribe. We all seek each other out when we're starting out and that provides an invaluable personal network to start off and grow with. I feel bad for the few people I see who aren't from the feeder private Ivy League tier schools because they have to start from nothing and even if they're successful they'll constantly face barriers.
  - JonFish85 13y ago
    I'll call shenanigans on that (at least in my experience). In this area (Boston), in my experience, there are 2 tiers of schools: elite and "the rest". Harvard, MIT, Stanford, etc. are all "elite" schools and move you to the top of the pile probably. Beyond that, the school is in the "and the rest" category, and you have to dig a bit deeper: GPA, jobs, specific interests, etc. "Undermining social mobility" because not every student can afford to go to a Stanford/MIT/Harvard $50k/yr school is.... a stretch. Sure, if every not-rich student was forced to go to University of Phoenix or a "school" of that ilk, maybe I'd buy it. State schools aren't really discriminated against that much (UMass has a great reputation (engineering/CS wise at least), U of Rhode Island, U of New Hampshire, as do the California state schools and I'm sure many, many others).