Thank you for this piece, Casey. This has been something I’ve been thinking about for a long time, and it’s got me reflecting on how we might need to disentangle two things we’ve conflated: college as a place to learn skills and college as the place where young people figure out who they are. The price tag becomes impossible to justify when we’re talking about 18-year-olds who are just starting to ask the big questions about life being thrust into making decisions about the entire trajectory of their careers.
One alternative that I think deserves another look was floated during Pete Buttigieg’s 2020 presidential campaign: a national service program that would give young people options beyond military service or expensive education. The idea was to create opportunities in areas like community health, conservation, and infrastructure alongside traditional military routes. At the time, the only conversation I heard about it was people laughing and calling it out of touch, but I think it was ahead of its time.
It addresses the problem of what kids can do to buy some time before they figure out what they want and who they are. It would give young people a chance to grow up, contribute to their communities, and explore without the pressure to make the “right” choice while committing to six figures of debt or a military career that by definition isn’t for everyone.
The current system completely ignores the kids who know college is out of reach and know military isn’t right for them. They can end up without the kinds of networks and relationships you described as one of college’s intangible benefits, left only with whatever connections they happen to make at jobs they land without a degree.
And perhaps this national service idea could also educate the students in some of the areas we most desperately need better understanding: media literacy, civics, and emotional intelligence. As a supervisor in charge of hiring, I can tell you that someone who had just a year learning basic life skills is a lot more valuable than someone who spent four years studying a subject that may or may not align with the job requirements.
A national service option could fill that gap. I hope Mr. Buttigieg is still keeping that idea in his pocket if he’s considering a 2028 run.
My son did not experience the greatest time in high school and was ready to be done with school. He bounced around jobs for a bit before I looked into AmeriCorps and encouraged him to do it if he passed all the medical stuff and got accepted. I really didn’t know what other options he would have. He did it. I was scared to send a kid who could barely keep track of his belongings from the kitchen to his bedroom, and had to send him on a plane that had flight changes. He was scared (as a game-playing, non-athlete) of the fitness program and being able to communicate effectively with his peers. The service was for 10 months, and at 30, he will tell you it’s the best thing he’s ever done. He was deeply saddened when Trump discontinued funding for the program, and I wonder if it’s even feasible to create a new program now.
Great analysis. Unless colleges and universities change their model to reflect changes in jobs, culture and economics they will continue to struggle. Burgat's third point about the outdated four-year-degree model was especially good. Making the goals and certification and degrees more modular and stackable is brilliant.
I didn't received my Bachelor's degree until I was nearly 40. I earned an Associate's right out of HS and then went to work. I didn't need more schooling for my career, it was more of a personal goal. I have a whole new appreciation for college after attending as an adult learner. I think college isn't just about getting the job, it's about learning critical thinking and gaining a deeper understanding of the things that primary school just scratches the surface of. As a result, I'm better at my job and I'm contributing more to society.
That said I agree that college isn't for everyone. I also acknowledge that I was fortunate enough to pay for my college in a reasonable amount of time, while working.
There is another piece that I see. I have a daughter in college and have a lot of parents of college students in my community and family. Loans become sort of a blank check and students are attending schools out of state that cost 2-3 times more than options in state. Unless there are scholarships involved that subsidize the out of state costs and/or unless parents/students have the cash to pay for it - I don't think some people are making the smartest financial decisions.
I have worked at graduate schools on the research side for the majority of my career and number 4 really is so true. The researcher brings in more grants from outside sources but excellent teachers are very much needed. It's painful to watch a great researcher not be able to teach, especially when you know how intelligent they are.
I'm always glad that I went to college. I did get so many positives outside of just my education during that time. But my total cost was less than one year at my college now. And with the structure of student loans I still struggled to pay the minimum they wanted and pay off the debt. In today's world college would not be an option for me.
As someone who’s been committed to education for most of my career and just resigned from a role as Dean of instruction and faculty at a small private university - these are all factors in my decision not to seek reemployment in the field right now. We’re watching a significant cultural (as well as supply and demand) shift and an industry that appears unwilling to think strategically about the sustainability of its product.
As a parent of a teen just entering high school, most of our conversations about higher education are focused on the wide variety of options and how to discern which might make the most sense when it comes time to decide in a few years. This generation already thinks about traditional college very differently than my generation did, and it will hopefully serve them well.
Why not attend a public college? Kamala’s husband graduated from the same public California university as I did! We both have done well. I did it without loans, working full-time, with 2 kids and most of it done at night.
If you lived on campus the public college I went to was around $8K a year in the early 2000s. Now it's close to $20K. Currently just tuition, fees and books is more than $8K a year, not including housing. That is more doable but still a lot to think about. I do think the age of 'living' on campus might be over for a lot of people. Nothing wrong with that of course, but it does change things. Not everyone has a college close to them to attend in person classes either.
I think "college" is an overly broad generalization of higher education. Trade schools and other options are great alternatives for many young people, and there is a huge need. In my area it is really difficult to find trades, whether good plumbers and electricians for my home, or techs for my company. I also question the value of a four year degree for many study areas. However, in science and engineering I would argue a four year degree (or higher) is still needed, and has the payback (a lot of engineers start out at $80K or even $100K+/year depending on geography). Talking about these different scenarios differently and giving students/young people choices rather than making it an argument of college being "good" or "bad" for all would be more constructive.
Thank you for this piece, Casey. This has been something I’ve been thinking about for a long time, and it’s got me reflecting on how we might need to disentangle two things we’ve conflated: college as a place to learn skills and college as the place where young people figure out who they are. The price tag becomes impossible to justify when we’re talking about 18-year-olds who are just starting to ask the big questions about life being thrust into making decisions about the entire trajectory of their careers.
One alternative that I think deserves another look was floated during Pete Buttigieg’s 2020 presidential campaign: a national service program that would give young people options beyond military service or expensive education. The idea was to create opportunities in areas like community health, conservation, and infrastructure alongside traditional military routes. At the time, the only conversation I heard about it was people laughing and calling it out of touch, but I think it was ahead of its time.
It addresses the problem of what kids can do to buy some time before they figure out what they want and who they are. It would give young people a chance to grow up, contribute to their communities, and explore without the pressure to make the “right” choice while committing to six figures of debt or a military career that by definition isn’t for everyone.
The current system completely ignores the kids who know college is out of reach and know military isn’t right for them. They can end up without the kinds of networks and relationships you described as one of college’s intangible benefits, left only with whatever connections they happen to make at jobs they land without a degree.
And perhaps this national service idea could also educate the students in some of the areas we most desperately need better understanding: media literacy, civics, and emotional intelligence. As a supervisor in charge of hiring, I can tell you that someone who had just a year learning basic life skills is a lot more valuable than someone who spent four years studying a subject that may or may not align with the job requirements.
A national service option could fill that gap. I hope Mr. Buttigieg is still keeping that idea in his pocket if he’s considering a 2028 run.
My son did not experience the greatest time in high school and was ready to be done with school. He bounced around jobs for a bit before I looked into AmeriCorps and encouraged him to do it if he passed all the medical stuff and got accepted. I really didn’t know what other options he would have. He did it. I was scared to send a kid who could barely keep track of his belongings from the kitchen to his bedroom, and had to send him on a plane that had flight changes. He was scared (as a game-playing, non-athlete) of the fitness program and being able to communicate effectively with his peers. The service was for 10 months, and at 30, he will tell you it’s the best thing he’s ever done. He was deeply saddened when Trump discontinued funding for the program, and I wonder if it’s even feasible to create a new program now.
Great analysis. Unless colleges and universities change their model to reflect changes in jobs, culture and economics they will continue to struggle. Burgat's third point about the outdated four-year-degree model was especially good. Making the goals and certification and degrees more modular and stackable is brilliant.
I didn't received my Bachelor's degree until I was nearly 40. I earned an Associate's right out of HS and then went to work. I didn't need more schooling for my career, it was more of a personal goal. I have a whole new appreciation for college after attending as an adult learner. I think college isn't just about getting the job, it's about learning critical thinking and gaining a deeper understanding of the things that primary school just scratches the surface of. As a result, I'm better at my job and I'm contributing more to society.
That said I agree that college isn't for everyone. I also acknowledge that I was fortunate enough to pay for my college in a reasonable amount of time, while working.
There is another piece that I see. I have a daughter in college and have a lot of parents of college students in my community and family. Loans become sort of a blank check and students are attending schools out of state that cost 2-3 times more than options in state. Unless there are scholarships involved that subsidize the out of state costs and/or unless parents/students have the cash to pay for it - I don't think some people are making the smartest financial decisions.
I have worked at graduate schools on the research side for the majority of my career and number 4 really is so true. The researcher brings in more grants from outside sources but excellent teachers are very much needed. It's painful to watch a great researcher not be able to teach, especially when you know how intelligent they are.
I'm always glad that I went to college. I did get so many positives outside of just my education during that time. But my total cost was less than one year at my college now. And with the structure of student loans I still struggled to pay the minimum they wanted and pay off the debt. In today's world college would not be an option for me.
Many other countries have 3-year undergraduate programs as the standard. I think the pilot 3-year programs in the US are a step long overdue.
As someone who’s been committed to education for most of my career and just resigned from a role as Dean of instruction and faculty at a small private university - these are all factors in my decision not to seek reemployment in the field right now. We’re watching a significant cultural (as well as supply and demand) shift and an industry that appears unwilling to think strategically about the sustainability of its product.
As a parent of a teen just entering high school, most of our conversations about higher education are focused on the wide variety of options and how to discern which might make the most sense when it comes time to decide in a few years. This generation already thinks about traditional college very differently than my generation did, and it will hopefully serve them well.
Why not attend a public college? Kamala’s husband graduated from the same public California university as I did! We both have done well. I did it without loans, working full-time, with 2 kids and most of it done at night.
If you lived on campus the public college I went to was around $8K a year in the early 2000s. Now it's close to $20K. Currently just tuition, fees and books is more than $8K a year, not including housing. That is more doable but still a lot to think about. I do think the age of 'living' on campus might be over for a lot of people. Nothing wrong with that of course, but it does change things. Not everyone has a college close to them to attend in person classes either.
I think "college" is an overly broad generalization of higher education. Trade schools and other options are great alternatives for many young people, and there is a huge need. In my area it is really difficult to find trades, whether good plumbers and electricians for my home, or techs for my company. I also question the value of a four year degree for many study areas. However, in science and engineering I would argue a four year degree (or higher) is still needed, and has the payback (a lot of engineers start out at $80K or even $100K+/year depending on geography). Talking about these different scenarios differently and giving students/young people choices rather than making it an argument of college being "good" or "bad" for all would be more constructive.