At an estimated value of $956 billion, student loan debt is one of the biggest sources of consumer debt in the nation and is larger than credit card and auto debt. In addition, student loans have a high delinquency rate of 11%. So what are politicians trying to do about this?
President Obama unveiled a "College Scorecard" in his State of the Union Address. This scorecard, which is now available on the Department of Education's website evaluates colleges based on one thing: money. The "score" of a college is based upon the average amount of debt by students, college graduation rates. State governments have also unveiled their plans to reduce debt. The most notable and controversial of these state-wide proposals is Republican Florida Governor Rick Scott's plan to reduce college tuition for STEM-related fields in state colleges. He also proposed to create a $10,000 bachelor's degree by combining traditional and online learning.
These ideas may work in the long-run. However, I do not think that they address the underlying issue of student loan debt. I believe that the problem of ballooning student loan debt stems from the way that politicians talk about college. Human beings relate to complex ideas in terms of simple metaphors; in the case of education, a "college degree" is the complex idea and an "investment" is the metaphor. According to cognitive linguist George Lakoff of UC-Berkeley, the metaphors used construct a "frame" in which the entire concept revolves around. When politicians call college an "investment" they invoke a wide array of related ideas; an investment has an expected "return". A good investment delivers a high rate of return; college, because it is an "investment" should also deliver a high "rate of return" (availability of high-paying jobs) or else it is not worthwhile. Because of the view that college is an investment, many students go to college simply to make more money in the future.
However, the theory of college being an investment is a myth. A college education is not something that you can package up and sell like other goods. You can't quantify the interactions you have in college into a simple dollar amount. If you truly want to make a lot of money, then invest the equivalent sum of a college tuition in the stock market. In order to control skyrocketing college debt, I propose that politicians start framing college as an "adventure' rather than an "investment". An "experience" brings up a whole new set of related ideas. Instead of a "return", you receive "memories" and "experiences". If college is framed in this way, students and employers will have to re-assess the value of a college education.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
California - The Next Leader in Education
The education reform community (almost) unanimously agrees that Bush's "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) has failed students. This law has put a large emphasis on standardized testing and "accountability" while ignoring the individual needs of students, educators, and the schools themselves. When Obama came into office, education reformers were optimistic that his administration would reverse some of the adverse effects of NCLB. Obama's "Race to the Top", however, turned out to be a re-hash of the same failed policies of the previous administration. Since Obama's current Secretary of Education Arne Duncan will (most likely) retain his position, it is unlikely that we will see major changes in national education policy. Thus, we have to turn our sights elsewhere for such change.
Luckily, we do not need to look further than the state of California. Two weeks ago, California Governor Jerry Brown delivered his "State of the State" address. During that speech, Gov. Brown gave special focus to the education policies he wishes to pursue this year. Notably, Gov. Brown wants to place control over education in the hands of local school boards instead of complicated, remote bureaucracies. In Governor Browns Words:
"I ask you [California lawmakers] to consider the principle of subsidiarity. Subsidiarity is the idea that a central authority should only perform those tasks which cannot be performed at a more immediate or local level. In other words, higher or more remote levels of government, like the state, should render assistance to local school districts, but always respect their primary jurisdiction and the dignity and freedom of teachers and students."
However, this principle must be treaded carefully. Localized control over schools can give rise to increased inequities in educational progress. For example, a school in a poor neighborhood with many non-native English speakers will not have a school board as effective as a school in Silicon Valley. In order to ameliorate such inequities, Gov. Brown also plans to distribute funds in the areas where they are most needed. Under this "Local Control Funding Formula", schools in poorer districts would get supplemental from the State Government.
The two-hit plan that Gov. Brown wishes to pursue is ambitious. If Gov. Brown succeeds with his plans, then California can serve as a model for the rest of the nation. The education reform community--and the rest of the country--should keep an eye on California in the upcoming months.
Luckily, we do not need to look further than the state of California. Two weeks ago, California Governor Jerry Brown delivered his "State of the State" address. During that speech, Gov. Brown gave special focus to the education policies he wishes to pursue this year. Notably, Gov. Brown wants to place control over education in the hands of local school boards instead of complicated, remote bureaucracies. In Governor Browns Words:
"I ask you [California lawmakers] to consider the principle of subsidiarity. Subsidiarity is the idea that a central authority should only perform those tasks which cannot be performed at a more immediate or local level. In other words, higher or more remote levels of government, like the state, should render assistance to local school districts, but always respect their primary jurisdiction and the dignity and freedom of teachers and students."
However, this principle must be treaded carefully. Localized control over schools can give rise to increased inequities in educational progress. For example, a school in a poor neighborhood with many non-native English speakers will not have a school board as effective as a school in Silicon Valley. In order to ameliorate such inequities, Gov. Brown also plans to distribute funds in the areas where they are most needed. Under this "Local Control Funding Formula", schools in poorer districts would get supplemental from the State Government.
The two-hit plan that Gov. Brown wishes to pursue is ambitious. If Gov. Brown succeeds with his plans, then California can serve as a model for the rest of the nation. The education reform community--and the rest of the country--should keep an eye on California in the upcoming months.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)