A small but influential group of economists and educators is pushing another pathway: for some students, no college at all. It’s time, they say, to develop credible alternatives for students unlikely to be successful pursuing a higher degree, or who may not be ready to do so.
Whether everyone in college needs to be there is not a new question; the subject has been hashed out in books and dissertations for years. But the economic crisis has sharpened that focus, as financially struggling states cut aid to higher education.
Among those calling for such alternatives are the economists Richard K. Vedder of Ohio University and Robert I. Lerman of American University, the political scientist Charles Murray, and James E. Rosenbaum, an education professor at Northwestern. They would steer some students toward intensive, short-term vocational and career training, through expanded high school programs and corporate apprenticeships.
“It is true that we need more nanosurgeons than we did 10 to 15 years ago,” said Professor Vedder, founder of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a research nonprofit in Washington. “But the numbers are still relatively small compared to the numbers of nurses’ aides we’re going to need. We will need hundreds of thousands of them over the next decade.”
“Passion and prejudice govern the world; only under the name of reason” --John Wesley
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Umm... what happened to leaving it up to the market?
As I understand it. When a job becomes more in demand wages will rise so as to fill them. When a job falls in demand wages will fall.
I've been seeing a lot of talk about whether we should start shifting kids away from going to university because the jobs are going to be in things that don't require...
First the benefits of higher education include things outside of the ability to get a job in the field "we need." Second, and I'm making a broad assumption here, most of these people arguing we should move away from directing kids into higher education and direct them into trades "we need" are conservatives that like to cheer on "free markets." If there are jobs "we need" the market will take care of it through the price system. Wages will rise or fall accordingly don't sweat it.
If we are going to talk about things "we need" shouldn't they be things we as human beings need be more broadly: the ability to flourish in relationships, career, and beyond through self-autonomy; the ability to participate on their own terms in the political realm as well as the marketplace?
Seems if your goal is to keep wages from rising you might want to direct people away from university; seems if your goal is to keep people from developing their full potentials to understand and enjoy the triumphs of the human experience, be it Shakespeare, Plato, or Nietzsche; seems if your goal is to create a neofedual order where workers do what they are told---then maybe its a good idea to direct kids away from higher education.
But try campaigning on that set of priorities.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment