Education’s Race to the Bottom (at the Top)

Colleges routinely boast about being “need blind” in admissions, meaning that they consider applicants without regard to their ability to pay. But even if they are need blind, and a new survey suggests they are, that may be very different from being an institution that any academically qualified student can actually attend.

That’s because only a small subset of colleges pledges to meet the full need of all students they admit. That means that for most institutions, “gapping” has become the norm. That’s when a college admits a student, tells her that she probably needs $X to afford to enroll, and then provides a package that is less than $X — sometimes considerably so.

Need Blind, but ‘Gapping’ : Scott Jaschik.

This is one of those perennial stories in which a no-doubt well-intentioned reported repeats the obvious: the less money you have, the more difficult it is to get into school. It’s like a little black spot on the bright star of American progress, and then it fades.

We just can’t see class, or rather, we can’t see ourselves as a class society, because that seems to imply that we are an unequal and so unjust society. I like this story, though, because it illustrates the roller coaster ride that goes with being a little too poor to afford college.

The real story about class and education, though, is not just that the vast majority of colleges ignore economic reality in their admissions programs, it also that president’s salaries are rising at record rates. So much so, in fact, that a few of them actually felt embarrassed.

It Sucks to be Poor

PITTSBURGH—Although state lotteries, on average, return just 53 cents for every dollar spent on a ticket, people continue to pour money into them — especially low-income people, who spend a larger percentage of their incomes on lottery tickets than do the wealthier segments of society. A new Carnegie Mellon University study sheds light on the reasons why low-income lottery players eagerly invest in a product that provides poor returns.

In the study, published in the July issue of the Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, participants who were made to feel subjectively poor bought nearly twice as many lottery tickets as a comparison group that was made to feel subjectively more affluent. The Carnegie Mellon findings point to poverty’s central role in people’s decisions to buy lottery tickets.

“Some poor people see playing the lottery as their best opportunity for improving their financial situations, albeit wrongly so,” said the study’s lead author Emily Haisley, a doctoral student in the Department of Organizational Behavior and Theory at Carnegie Mellon’s Tepper School of Business. “The hope of getting out of poverty encourages people to continue to buy tickets, even though their chances of stumbling upon a life-changing windfall are nearly impossibly slim and buying lottery tickets in fact exacerbates the very poverty that purchasers are hoping to escape.”

July 24: Carnegie Mellon Study Uncovers Why Low-Income People Buy Lottery Tickets – Carnegie Mellon University.

I don’t mean to be facetious, because this is very important research into what has become an almost violently regressive form of taxation, but in the end what it says is simple: it sucks to be poor. The lottery is particularly sinister, too, because it has often been sold as a way to help the poor through better funding of the public schools. This is another legacy of conservative politics.

The money has only rarely (if ever) used to help schools, of course. I am hoping that in the near future we will look back on this and think: trying to raise tax money through a lottery was both stupid and cruel. My inner cynic is especially skeptical, though, because lotteries have been so well marketed that their image of harmless fun will be difficult if not impossible to change.

High-Skill Educations

Several recent reports underscore the 21st century challenges we face as a nation. First, disparities in educational attainment persist across racial and ethnic groups: Forty-two percent of whites ages 25 to 64 have an associate’s degree or higher compared with 26 percent of African Americans and 18 percent of Hispanics. Second, assuming no significant changes in degree attainment patterns, the United States will fall 16 million degrees short of the number needed to match leading nations in the percentage of adults with a college degree and to meet the workforce needs of 2025.

Third, high-skill jobs that require advanced learning (a postsecondary education credential) will make up almost half of all job growth in the United States in the next decade. Without increasing the labor supply in these economic sectors, businesses and corporations will look elsewhere to hire college-educated workers. Fourth, stagnation in educational attainment is not only a problem of access to colleges and universities; in fact, barely half of students (54 percent) who begin college complete a degree or certificate, which ranks the United States last among the development economy member nations of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.

Federal Access Policies and Higher Education for Working Adults.

This report gets filed under “saving capitalism from itself” along with the green jobs programs of the Apollo Group I wrote about earlier in the week. Education is a harder sell, I think, despite the long-standing political necessity of emphasizing it’s importance. It’s also important to define education carefully.

I lived in Austin, Texas, in the 1980s, just as the digital juggernaut was just beginning to build up steam. All of the technology firms claimed that they were coming to Austin becuase of the well educated workforce. They said, in effect, that they wanted to take advantage of all of those slackers with doctorates.

What was interesting was that at the same time these same companies were setting up programs at the community colleges to provide the sorts of technical training needed in high tech factories. In fact, they were not at all interested in those slackers; too many of them had liberal arts degrees.

They knew that they could get the workers they needed on the cheap. Unless we are careful, the green revolution may well turn out to be a similarly hollow promise. The ideals of the liberal arts education was that education was an end in itself as well as a means to a better job. It’s as important as ever.