·
In this post, St. John’s College President Christopher B. Nelson argues that “education and economics are essentially incompatible” and that the economic lens is the wrong way to judge education.
Touches on a couple of real issues, but the central claim is extremely dubious: the argument of information not being a "well-behaved" scarce good applies well to information like a sound file, a movie, a Wikipedia article; but selling information isn't remotely what colleges do. I find it incomprehensible that the author who wrote this: 1. at least one teacher who made learning exciting 2. personal concern of teachers for students 3. finding a mentor 4. working on a long-term project for at least one semester 5. opportunities to put classroom learning into practice through internships or jobs 6. rich extracurricular activities didn't understand that the price of college is the price of renting educators' time and an environment conducive to growth. Nothing on that list is about information, or similarly non-scarce goods.The Gallup-Purdue Index Report entitled “Great Jobs, Great Lives” found six crucial factors linking the college experience to success at work and overall well-being in the long term:
As a society, an educated electorate is important. However, an electorate that buys things instead of paying of debt with jobs that don't pay more because so many people are getting degrees is also very important to society. College's worth can definitely be measured and counted. It's value stops where the cost to the people is higher than the potential benefit of making improved elections and such. Secondly, colleges, or my college, has not felt like a place that you go to learn and expand your mind anymore. It's a place where you jump through hoops to get a degree to hopefully get a job that requires one, to hopefully make more money. College for personal reasons is for the incredibly rich who have parents that can afford to pay for their college. Otherwise, it's a very poor decision unless you can make more money in the long run (years spent on a treadmill are also potential costs that aren't on the debt).
–
This is the problem the author was addressing. If we insist on seeing college as an economic good, then we, both students and schools, will ignore and neglect the educational aspect of it. Since education is the primary purpose of schools, we end up with an education that isn't. I don't think employers should be able to use degrees as a qualification for any sort of work.Secondly, colleges, or my college, has not felt like a place that you go to learn and expand your mind anymore. It's a place where you jump through hoops to get a degree to hopefully get a job that requires one, to hopefully make more money.
–
If this were the case, colleges would crash and burn overnight. Nobody would go to a place like college without incentive. Getting a better job, for the vast majority, is that incentive.I don't think employers should be able to use degrees as a qualification for any sort of work.
–
If that were the case, colleges would have the opportunity to revert to the educational institutions they used to be. Believe it or not, many people want to learn. These people are the reason that the liberal arts still exist in schools.If this were the case, colleges would crash and burn overnight.
–
Many people want to learn. Most can't afford it, or justify the expense without it having a return. With this being true, the modern college system would crash and burn overnight. Some would stay afloat, as some would still go to colleges, but the vast majority would die off.