28 Aug 13
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/08/23/barack-obama-education-plan-college-rating-system/#!slide=6006504
It seems now that Obama is proposing a college rating system. This rating system will be determined by such things as graduation rates, tuition rates, and job placement after college, or lack thereof.
Colleges that rank low on these ratings systems will then have federal funds be withheld.
Call me crazy, but I'm guessing that graduation rates will no skyrocket!! 😲
28 Aug 13
Originally posted by whodeyThis sounds excellent. Hopefully, this will slow the massive transfer of federal dollars (via student financial aid) to the many sham for-profit "universities."
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2013/08/23/barack-obama-education-plan-college-rating-system/#!slide=6006504
It seems now that Obama is proposing a college rating system. This rating system will be determined by such things as graduation rates, tuition rates, and job placement after college, or lack thereof.
Colleges that rank low on these ratings systems ...[text shortened]... be withheld.
Call me crazy, but I'm guessing that graduation rates will no skyrocket!! 😲
28 Aug 13
1 edit
Originally posted by moon1969Indeed. That way all kids will get into college and then graduate. No kid will be left out of college and no kid will be allowed to fail.
This sounds excellent. Hopefully, this will slow the massive transfer of federal dollars (via student financial aid) to the many sham for-profit "universities."
Basically a college degree will become equivalent to a high school degree, only you will have to wait four more years for it and be thousands of dollars in debt to get your high school diploma.
28 Aug 13
7 edits
Originally posted by whodeyThis ranking is a long-time coming, much-needed, and very welcomed.
Indeed. That way all kids will get into college and then graduate. No kid will be left out of college and no kid will be allowed to fail.
Basically a college degree will become equivalent to a high school degree, only you will have to wait four more years for it and be thousands of dollars in debt to get your high school diploma.
Job placement is key. We have to do something about these crap for-profit universities taking massive federal dollars and convincing students to go into massive debt, and with no job opportunity.
What is nice is the ranking will expose this and help promote more traditional public and private universities where degrees mean something and offer more job opportunities, and are also much cheaper generally for in-state public schools.
In-state tuition at Texas A&M is about $8,000 per year and with the degrees offering many job opportunities.
In stark contrast, tuition at the for-profit "universities" are $30,000+ per year and with no job opportunities. Further, many students do not graduate. It's a sham. These charlatan for-profit "schools" are lining their pockets with massive federal dollars -- our tax dollars. I love that this ranking will show job placement and expose these crooks.
Well-done Mr. President.
28 Aug 13
Focussing on more education ignores the real problem - wealth is too concentrated to provide jobs for everyone. If one person owns one hundred peoples' homes, one hundred people need to pay him rent, but he doesn't need to give one hundred people jobs. In fact, the capitalist system rewards him for NOT employing people because you don't need to employ people to acquire money. You just need to own their stuff so they have to find a way to pay you.
28 Aug 13
Originally posted by KazetNagorraYou completely miss the point about graduation rates. The only way these for-profit universities can graduate more if the students have the money.
For once whodey has a good point: judging colleges by graduation rates will, naturally, make them graduate students more easily.
The sham is that the for-profit universities never intend to graduate the students but just suck as much money as possible from the students, which typically happens the first couple of years of the student's attendance.
Once the student runs out of money and taps all their financial aid, the for-profit universities are not going to let the students attend for free to boost graduation rates.
28 Aug 13
Originally posted by moon1969That happened to me in grad school
You completely miss the point about graduation rates. The only way these for-profit universities can graduate more if the students have the money.
The sham is that the for-profit universities never intend to graduate the students but just suck as much money as possible from the students, which typically happens the first couple of years of the student's ...[text shortened]... rofit universities are not going to let the students attend for free to boost graduation rates.
28 Aug 13
5 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI appreciate your discussion but what is your suggestion generally for the poor and middle-class 18 year old. Go to college or not?
Focussing on more education ignores the real problem - wealth is too concentrated to provide jobs for everyone. If one person owns one hundred peoples' homes, one hundred people need to pay him rent, but he doesn't need to give one hundred people jobs. In fact, the capitalist system rewards him for NOT employing people because you don't need to empl ...[text shortened]... le to acquire money. You just need to own their stuff so they have to find a way to pay you.
I was dirt poor at age 18, and paid on my own working part-time with a tiny amount of financial aid (and no help from parents), for a chemical engineering degree at a cheap major in-state university, and then made a lot of money (at least for me) for 13 years as a chemical engineer. Also, traveled around and live in other parts of the world, all expenses paid, for work.
I paid for my wife to go to college (no help from her parents) and she has now long had a secure job (not that high-paying) as a public school teacher.
I got a law degree and now write patents, and am in top 3% in income. Is it top 1%? No. Am I wealthy, No. Do I have family money. No? Do I own massive real estate? No. Am I paying for kids to go to college? Yes. In the end, I will die essentially "poor" and maybe leave my kids some money.
Yet, again, what is your suggestion for the bright poor 18-year old? Focus on education or not focus on education? Is it a mistake for a poor or middle-class 18-year old to focus on education?
28 Aug 13
2 edits
Originally posted by moon1969I'm talking to Obama, not to some dirt poor kid.
I appreciate your discussion but what is your suggestion generally for the poor and middle-class 18 year old. [b]Go to college or not?
I was dirt poor at age 18, and paid on my own working part-time with a tiny amount of financial aid (and no help from parents), for a chemical engineering degree at a cheap major in-state university, and then made a s on education? Is it a mistake for a poor or middle-class 18-year old to focus on education?[/b]
EDIT - What do you think will happen to the job market for chemical engineers if everyone has a chemical engineering degree?
Suddenly, the degree is worthless, and you're back to trying to prove your worthiness to have a job because you are easily replaceable.
When you got your chemical engineering degree it was something special because not everyone else had one. More educated populace means educated people are in greater supply and so the price goes down. As wealth is concentrated demand goes down. Standard suppy/demand theory.
28 Aug 13
2 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungShortage of chemical engineers now, even much more of a shortage than when I graduated. The US is having to import immigrant engineers. No end in sight.
I'm talking to Obama, not to some dirt poor kid.
EDIT - What do you think will happen to the job market for chemical engineers if everyone has a chemical engineering degree?
Suddenly, the degree is worthless, and you're back to trying to prove your worthiness to have a job because you are easily replaceable.
When you got your chemical enginee ...[text shortened]... e price goes down. As wealth is concentrated demand goes down. Standard suppy/demand theory.
Job placement for chemical engineers at Texas A&M (a very cheap graduate school, by the way) -- even with low grade point averages -- is near 100%, and starting annual salaries are about $70,000-$80,000.
28 Aug 13
Originally posted by moon1969Too bad I "only" studied Biochemistry. Guess that's not good enough.
Shortage of chemical engineers now, even much more of a shortage than when I graduated. The US is having to import immigrant engineers. No end in sight.
Job placement for chemical engineers at Texas A&M (a very cheap graduate school, by the way) -- even with low grade point averages -- is near 100%, and starting annual salaries are about $70,000-$80,000.