Higher Education? – Book Review

***Updated for 2023***

 

I discovered The Math Myth and Other STEM Delusions by Andrew Hacker doing some research for something else entirely. I quickly ordered the book, read it in short order, underlined so many portions my pencil complained of exhaustion, nodded in agreement with so many statements, and immediately wrote a book review for it, which you can find here.

I found myself in a conundrum, though. It wasn’t just that the book was good – scores of books are a treat to read – no, it was that the book had a special mix of and carried my opinion, which I found intriguing, to say the least. Finding myself in agreement with him on so many things, I longed for more. I canvased the internet and looked over his other books. Enter Higher Education? – which is co-authored by Claudia Dreifus, his wife.

Written in 2010, the book takes a behind-the-scenes look at higher education as an institution and how it operates – which, the book asserts, is not how it was intended. Rather, higher education was chiefly that; for higher education or, more specifically, the arts and humanities.

I admit my bias when I excitedly read a book such as this; namely, I underscore that which is reproachful and accusatory. Since this is the case, it took me several chapters to discover the main point the book was making; that what is taking place in colleges and universities “isn’t education. It’s training.” Lamenting the erosion of the liberal arts, they write “It’s not surprising that many of them would pick vocational majors. After all, the stay-in-school message they’ve heard is that a degree brings higher earnings and status.”

I would like to draw your attention to that last sentence because it corroborates the “you have to go to college to get a good job” mentality so many of us have heard for decades, now. Apropos, you can click some of my other articles below for more information.

College – Is it worth it?

Let’s Talk About the Skilled Trades

Why Skilled Trades Have the Best Game In Town

Following this eye-opening sentiment, they write about visiting Oregon State University and conversing with students majoring in liberal arts subjects. And what did they have to say?

“They told us they were constantly badgered by parents and relatives who wanted to know how supposedly useless subjects would help them move up the social ladder.”

Not to digress too much, but  I’d like to state this is one of the main points on this site: too much emphasis is placed on a piece of paper. Parents, teachers, and society in general hold the opinion that you have to go to college to get a good job – or, as the authors write here, “move up the social ladder.” Simply put, it’s a hazing ritual continued by those who have endured it. It exists to this day because it’s propped up throughout our society, as evidenced by the above.

It is here, however, that we come to a crossroads. The authors lament the demise of the liberal arts and the rise of vocational training. They believe the premise of higher education should, indeed be, higher education. The leviathan that’s arisen in its stead promulgates vocational training and disconnected, overpaid tenure professors. I can certainly agree with their sentiment, though it isn’t the totality of my contention. Indeed, I do not dispute what has taken the place of a classical education. Rather, my take is simply that in large part, the vocational training many pay for (for years and years, I might add) is simply not worth it. Scores of graduates have been unable to land a job after believing the lie that they needed to go to college to get a good job. It is only after they graduated, postponing adulthood by 4+ years, and saddling themselves with debt they can’t claim bankruptcy on, they fully realize they are, for some, back to square one. Didn’t I tell you I would digress?

Notably, the authors write,

“That vocational programs are chosen while students are applying from high school.” This is important because “there’s one thing they don’t know, and there is no way they can at their age. It is what the world of adult careers is actually like.” – Chapter 6, Page 101

Can I get an amen?!

Listen, I’m willing to admit there are some teenagers who know what they want to do with their life AND it involves a college – or higher education – route. Forge ahead. young Padawan. Most teens, though, do not have a clue what they want to do, as evidenced by the scores of those who do not work in the field they majored in. My advice has been for many years now that if you don’t know what you want to do for a living, then, go get a job. Any job. Chances are, you aren’t going to like it, prompting you to ask, “What do I want to do for a living? Because this isn’t it.”

Real-world experience need not apply

Don’t waste our time; real-world experience need not apply

Aside from their laments over liberal arts, they also note the trend of professors lacking real-world experience. While reviewing the University of Houston, they looked over the business admin department given the number of those degrees had long become a favorite. The professor, they noted, had a career that was,

“Entirely academic; he has never worked in a profit-seeking enterprise.”

My initial thought was I know of some in the workplace who lack experience – and yet they hold positions of esteem. Not to launch into another diatribe, though, their thought continued:

“We learned this is common: business schools prefer professors with PhDs to men and women who have had hands-on careers. Indeed, accreditation expects that a majority of regular faculty have doctoral degrees.” – Chapter 6, page 103

One is left to wonder how rich the educational experience would be if classes were taught by business owners or, in a broader sense, taught by those rich in experience.

It’s telling when they postulate what a business graduate does in their first few years of working at a bank. While listening to senior directors explain their business acumen and decisions, they write “We’d like to think that liberal arts students can just as quickly pick up what will be expected in their first years on the job.” To that end, I’d like to think persons without college degrees but in-house training could perform the same tasks, as well. Yes, there is a lot that can – and possibly should – be learned in structured classes; like law as it pertains to banking, in this example. This, however, is a good time to point out something I’ve long thought: namely, it is classes, and not degrees, that enhance an individual.

In another vein, the book notes that even in fields where hands-on is essential, such as nursing, “we are asked to be pleased that hands-on training is being supplanted by transcultural models and humanistic theories.” This is because “professors who teach vocational skills realize that insofar as what they do is viewed as practical (like how to wield a syringe or monitor ICUs), it lowers their status in their college community.” – Chapter 6, Page 106

Say it louder for those in the back, please.

There were a few statements made which I disagreed with near the end of the book. This isn’t to be a surprise; no one agrees with someone 100%. Still, I thought their arguments and points lost potential readers and cost them some measure of credibility that was unnecessary. I lament their digression because the book was otherwise a compilation of facts, figures, and taking on the college industrial complex – something which we desperately need more of.

Afterword

Down to the final words

I purchased the book in 2020, and the copy I purchased boasts of a new afterword, addressing some of the most contentious points others raised. I’d do the same thing; allow an afterword to address some of the criticism brought about because of my previous work.

For example, they write that,

“What we found, particularly at gatherings with a strong faculty presence, was an insistence on preserving just about every practice to which professors and administrators had grown accustomed. This was in direct contrast to the reception the book received from nonacademic reviewers who recognized that students are being shortchanged, with the culprits being the adults who are carving out careers on our campuses.”  Afterword – p.247

“The major finding: more than a third – 36 percent – of the seniors were no better at ‘critical thinking’ then that had been back in their freshman year.” – After word, Page 250-251

In line with what this website has railed about since its inception, the authors also note,

“At the end of 2010, college loans were approaching $900 billion, surpassing the credit card debt of all American households. Almost two-thirds of undergraduates are indenturing themselves, with balances growing so high that defaults approaching subprime mortgages seem all but inevitable. Nor will it do to say, as the college board has, that a typical senior graduates with ‘only’ $24,000 in debt. What is seldom mentioned is that with interest, collection charges, and penalties for postponed payments, the amounts owed are regularly exceeding $100,000.” Afterword – p.256

“Indeed, the whole cash flow of colleges and universities had been predicated on having their students go into debt. Tuition fees have been doubled and tripled in real dollars, while misnamed ‘ financial aid’ includes sending undergraduates to lenders. At Birmingham-Southern College, 79 percent of the students borrow, and at Iowa’s Coe College, the figure is 81 percent. Without loans taken out by teenagers there wouldn’t be the costly athletic programs, luxurious amenities,s and professors who draw salaries for not teaching.” Afterword, Page 256

“So colleges continue to run on myths and mantras, illusions and delusions that prevent them from confronting what’s under their noses. This has persisted as campuses have long been insulated from outside scrutiny, subsisting on assumptions that are only beginning to be questioned.” Afterword, Page 258

I’ll add to the above that the debt, at the end of 2019, was 1.47 Trillion, and shows no signs of diminishing. Indeed, as long as parents, educators, guidance counselors, and society in general continue to proffer college as the only viable option, the debt level will undoubtedly increase, teetering on collapse. At this point, I surmise it is a matter of when, not if.

Other Notable Portions of Higher Education

Taking note of that which intrigues me

“We may also find that an engineering degree doesn’t need four or five years, especially when students are more mature. Professors like to elongate programs because it allows them to spin out their hyperspecialties. Even law schools are beginning to admit that their third year isn’t necessary.” – Chapter 6, Page 106

 

“The best study we’ve seen was carried out by Norton Grubb of Berkeley and Marvin Lazerson at the University of Pennsylvania. They found that the most crucial skills are learned on the job, across all occupations and professions. ‘The abilities necessary in employment,’ they write, ‘are dependent on the work setting itself.'” – Chapter 6, Page 107

 

“According to the College Board, since 1982 tuition charges at private colleges have ballooned more than two and a half times in inflation-adjusted dollars. That’s right. For every $1,000 parents were asked to pay in 1982, they must hand over $2,540 in real money today.” – Chapter 7, Page 114

 

“You’d be paying fifteen dollars for a gallon of milk if it had gone up as fast as tuition in the past twenty years; that’s how out of whack it is.” – Chapter 7, Page 115

 

“Since the mid-1980s, as we have noted, full professors’ pay at Stanford has increased by 58 percent in constant dollars; at the University of North Carolina they are up 56 percent; and at Duke 65 percent.” – Chapter 7, Page 117

 

“Since 1976, the ratio of bureaucrats to students has literally doubled, contributing to a tandem rise in tuition fees.” – Chapter 7, Page 118

 

“In academia, as in the corporate arena, executive compensation cannot be ignored. Between 1992 and 2008 – that’s only sixteen years – the salaries of most of the college presidents we looked at more than doubled in constant-value dollars. Some rose closer to threefold. (For a comparison, overall American earnings rose by 6 percent during this period.)” – Chapter 7, Page 119

 

“Due to the loan industry’s lobbying, Congress obligingly decreed that student loans can never be discharged by bankruptcy. Higher education, which cheered on this borrowing to ensure its own cash flow, has created its counterpart of the housing bubble.” – Chapter 7, Page 125

 

“Another study also parsed the records of Asian applicants at highly selective colleges. In actual fact, 24 percent of them were admitted. But had a “color-blind” method been used, 32 percent would have been given places. The short answer is that these colleges impose quotas due to fears that they may appear ‘too Asian,’ just as in earlier decades schools were anxious about becoming ‘too Jewish.'” – Chapter 10, Page 180

Personal End notes – for Higher Education

My own personal end notes to this great book

I’d like to bring this book review/post to a close, but before I do, I feel the need to explain the divergent paths the authors and I seem to be at. They lament the loss of higher education as a whole while a shift has taken place in colleges and universities across the nation. That shift has brought about what they refer to as “vocation training,” a term I can stand behind. How else do you explain new avenues such as “welding technology” and “landscape design?” The authors express their own frustration over the liberal arts and their increasing unpopularity with the general public, parents, etc. I can understand their frustration here, too. After all, the intention of the humanities and liberal arts is to educate, to stimulate critical thinking, and to promulgate the richness contained therein. For my part, a quick survey reveals this doesn’t happen today, anyway. Critical thinking has been – for several decades, as far as I can tell – under assault in this country; resulting in an entire generation who’ve adopted the slave mindset, instead.

Where I break from them, however, is the nature of the vocational training. I have said several times in various posts that if your career choices necessitated the college path (think nursing, for example) then carry on, for it is something imperative. For the welder, though? Hardly. My stance is simple and hasn’t changed for years: join an apprenticeship if you want to learn welding. What can “welding technology,” (a career study certificate) for example, teach you that you can’t get out of an apprenticeship? I’ll wager, especially with the massive number of shipyards I have in my area, that you stand a far better chance of exposing yourself to better welding procedures, practices, materials, etc. than you will at a college. What’s more, the icing on the cake is that you can get paid to learn whereas you are paying someone with college. It behooves you to pay attention to one of the most important tenets – passion vs. opportunity – and act accordingly. Caveat: forget following passion; opportunity is where it’s at.

It is my contention that colleges and the system as a whole wanted to increase their ranks, monies received, and status by increasing their numbers. Clearly, a degree in the humanities wasn’t attractive for many, so they swelled their ranks by offering an ever-increasing palate of vocational programs – many of which are overrated, as far as I’m concerned. Also, by dissecting their “vocational training paths,” they stimulate a point in a broader discussion I have long felt to be true. Simply put, contained in many of those programs are classes that have no real merit worthwhile to the actual job. Or, to put it another way, it is classes, and not the degree, which enhance a person. Yet another thread I’ll chase in a different post.

Inflating what is needed to actually provide vocational training has increased costs, justified jobs, and caused an entire generation to sink into greater debt for those “jobs” that aren’t there. Is it any wonder people who buy the lie are dumbfounded to discover they have been hoodwinked? Hardly.

To wrap up this personal note, while the authors bemoan the decline of liberal arts and the rise of vocational training, I question the validity of much of the vocational training in the first place. Nursing has merit, but I doubt landscaping design does – not to the extent it’s proffered. I’ll wager a more expedient and fruitful route is to start working with a landscaping firm – at the bottom if necessary – and become a sponge. A degree (or career certificate) has nothing on experience.

Conclusion – Higher Education Review

I readily admit I have a disdain against the cultural mantra of “you have to go to college to get a good job.” As I’ve stated elsewhere, it’s demonstrably false. The authors have taken an in-depth look at how “higher education” functions, its shortcomings, cost, and provide facts and figures to back up their assertions. This book is a stellar critique of the college institution, the leviathan it has become, and, according to the authors, what it rather should be.

In short, it is a book every parent and prospective student should read.