Skip to main content

Value of a Degree

Time has an interesting piece about the cost and value of a college degree.

(from flickr user tantrum_dan)

There are two notable points made in article. First, this quote from Marty Nemko:
Marty Nemko, a career and education expert who has taught at U.C. Berkeley's Graduate School of Education, contends that the overflow in degree holders is the result of many weaker students attending colleges when other options may have served them better. "There is tremendous pressure to push kids through," he says, adding that as a result, too many students who aren't skilled become degree holders, promoting a perception among employers that higher education doesn't work. "That piece of paper no longer means very much, and employers know that," says Nemko. "Everybody's got it, so it's watered down.
To some extent, the system is broken. Last week I wrote about people who self-select courses and professors not because they want to learn something or take away anything of concrete value from the course, but simply because they know they are likely to get the highest grade for the least amount of effort. Since then, I've had several people admit that this is exactly what they do. I understand the incentives they're responding to; the system is set up so that what you get out of a course isn't necessarily proportional to what you put in. The article goes on:
The devaluation of a college degree is no secret on campus. An annual survey by the Higher Education Research Institute has long asked freshmen what they think their highest academic degree will be. In 1972, 38% of respondents said a bachelor's degree, but in 2008 only 22% answered the same. The number of freshmen planning to get a master's degree rose from 31% in 1972 to 42% in 2008. Says John Pryor, the institute's director: "Years ago, the bachelor's degree was the key to getting better jobs. Now you really need more than that."
This reminds me of an anecdote I read in an economics book recently (I wish I could remember which book). The first woman to wear high-heeled shoes was at a distinct advantage being several inches taller than everyone else. But as more women started wearing them, the advantage started to fade. Eventually, high-heeled shoes generated no relative advantage, but became a sort of "requirement" in social situations. Granted, there's a big difference here, in the sense that a society is better off when everyone is well-educated, but there really isn't much social gain from women who appear a few inches taller. The problem is that the cost of educating everyone is so painfully expensive.

The Great Recession has had some strange impacts. There are people in my class who aren't even bothering to look for work, because enough people have told them they can just "ride it out" in grad school. I'm not complaining if it means less competition in my own entry-leveljob search, but for the people I care about, I'm not sure how it will ultimately play out. Two years from now, if the economy recovers, which person will be theoretically more employable?.. a bachelor's degree holder with two years of full-time professional experience? or a master's degree holder with none?

Comments

austin said…
unlike high heeled shoes, not everyone is qualified to get a degree. as long as standards do not become a total joke a good portion of the unqualified that are unjustly pushed into higher education by high school consolers and others who believe all children are above average will fail. i do think that too many people are getting college degrees, but at least there is currently a limit to the number who can get them.
Angie said…
I think, these days, you need to distinguish yourself, whether that's through work or graduate school. Even undergrads, to compete, need to really be excelling. It's one thing to earn a degree doing the bare minimum. It's another thing to really achieve a lot in school. Employers know the difference.

Popular posts from this blog

In Praise of Southwest's 'C' Boarding Group

A few weeks ago I saw a tweet from someone complaining that their Southwest Airlines boarding pass had been assigned A20 (meaning they would be at least one of the first twenty passengers to board the plane). Apparently this person though they should have been assigned a higher number, less their flight experience be considerably spoiled.

Despite the complaints, Southwest has resisted demands to assign seats on its flights, a decision which I personally applaud. I'll admit that I was skeptical when they rolled out the newest boarding procedure, assigning both boarding groups and a line number; but in hindsight it seems like one of the best operational decisions they've ever made. If nothing else, it effectively eliminated the infamous "cattle call" whereby fliers were getting to airports hours in advance and sitting in line on the floor as if they were waiting for the midnight showing of the new Star Wars movie.

When I was an intern at Southwest Airlines last winter, I…

So You Want to be a Southwest Airlines Intern?

My personal website must have pretty decent SEO - because in the past year, I've received about two dozen emails from aspiring Southwest Airlines interns looking to draw on my experience in search of their own dream internship. In the past two weeks alone a few new emails have already started rolling in...

(from flickr user San Diego Shooter)

If you've found your way here, you might be hoping for the silver bullet; a secret tip that will propel you above the competition. Unfortunately, I do not know any inside secrets. I can only share my experience as an internship candidate about two years ago and, rather than responding individually to future emails I anticipate to receive, I hope that potential interns will find the information posted here valuable.

Understand: Southwest Airlines is a very unique company. The corporate culture at Southwest is truly unlike that of nearly every other company. But you probably already knew that, since it now seems mandatory for every management,…

Good Advertising

The blogosphere seems to be one fire over Microsoft's new "Lauren" TV commercial. Frankly, I don't see what the commotion is about.



If the critics are correct, then "Lauren" is actually Lauren De Long, a Screen Actors Guild eligible actress; and apparently, if you look close enough, she never even enters the Apple store.

Even if all of that is true, it doesn't refute the fact that Apple's laptops are significantly more expensive than most PCs. It isn't a lie that Apple doesn't sell any 17-inch laptops for less than a grand. The advertisement doesn't make any reference to the quality of the machines (or contest any of the claims made in Apple's "I'm a PC" commercials) or provide any good reason to buy one other than price.

As far as I can tell, after years of horrible commercials and a series of flops, Microsoft seems to finally have hired an ad agency that put together a decent advertisement. It's not likely to persuad…