Stressing that "education is an economic issue," President Obama renewed on Monday his call for the United States to produce an additional eight million college graduates by 2020 and reclaim the top spot as the country with the highest percentage of college graduates.
It's a goal that he has touted since taking office and repeated before a cheering crowd at the University of Texas at Austin with emphasis on the need for an educated work force as the nation emerges from recession.
"Over a third of America's college students, and over half our minority students, don't earn a degree, even after six years," the president said. "So, we don't just need to open the doors of college to more Americans, we need to make sure they stick with it through graduation."
He also spoke of the importance of education in today's global economy. "We know beyond a shadow of a doubt that countries that out-educate us today will out-compete us tomorrow," the president said.
As he's done in the past, President Obama praised the nation's community colleges, calling them "a great, under-appreciated asset that we should value and support." He emphasized Tennessee's Cleveland State Community College, which has boosted graduation rates after redesigning its remedial math courses.
"We ought to make a significant investment to help other states do the same," he said.
President Obama offered no new higher-education policy proposals in Monday's speech. Rather, he highlighted his administration's work in making college more affordable by increasing Pell Grant awards, simplifying the federal student-aid application form, and making information more widely available to students and their families about college costs and completion rates.
He also said his administration is making loan repayments more manageable for students so they don't graduate with massive loan payments each month.
Comments
1. aetolius - August 10, 2010 at 06:14 am
Too bad President Obama isn't providing jobs to all the new college graduates once they're out. Like so many leaders before him, he thinks he can solve such a deep infrastructural problem by attempting to focus on a single aspect. Education is related to the economy, that's for sure, but it is also related to most other major areas of society too; to change one area is, in a sense, to change everything, and good policies anticipate such dramatic shifts. Part of the reason why so many of us who follow the Chronicle are in dire straits withi the job market is because the supply is so much greater than the demand, brought on in part by removing the mandatory retirement laws of faculty. As a result, faculty aren't retiring which means less jobs; graduate schools realize this with their grad students (i.e. research/teaching assistants) staying in school longer which means less departmental money to fund stipends for new graduate students which increases the competition to get into grad school, and so on. You change one thing like removing a retirement law and umpteen more prospective graduate students are denied access. Only when Obama realizes this fact will he be a good leader--not until then.
2. fburtnett - August 10, 2010 at 10:02 am
Too little is being done to close the "achievement gap" and create a level playing field for all American students. We are also failing to provide the appropriate career and college counseling services required to promote exploration, decision-making and movement through the various student transitions. Words need to be converted into constructive change designed to promote career and college readiness. Students and then America will be the beneficiaries.
Frank Burtnett, author of the Bound-For-Career Guidebook and the Bound-For-College Guidebook (Rowman & Littlefield Education)
3. physicsprof - August 10, 2010 at 10:10 am
Yes, Aetolius, Obama will be a great leader then (once he is "providing jobs to all the new college graduates"), but America will become the nation of sheeps. Hilarious. For a former emigree it is amusing to see so much entitlement and whining among American youths. The message I have for my son is simple: don't worry, once you learn how to work and study and sweat, there is very little competition from American-born and American-educated workforce. The message I have for my students is equally simple: it is time to worry for you in this global economy, because the standards of education are so low here and you learn so little during those 4 years of partying and complaining.
4. jaysanderson - August 10, 2010 at 10:18 am
I cannot believe anything obama says. Really attractive, eloquently-presented lies are still just lies.
Why is his wife spending $100k/day of taxpayer money to take 40 of her friends to the beach in Spain? WTF? How about our own Gulf Coast for which the first family feigned so much concern?
What about honesty, integrity, service and stewardship? That's what I voted for--not a pseudo-royal family.
5. jaysanderson - August 10, 2010 at 10:20 am
while i vented above, physicsprof (3) was speaking some serious truth. Not pleasant or easy to hear, but truthful.
6. hadvisor - August 10, 2010 at 11:03 am
As someone who previously taught as an adjunct within public state-supported post-secondary institutions in Illinois, and ultimately left teaching due to being unable to secure a regular (and reasonably paying) position in her area of expertise, one might think I would second aetolius' call for a mandatory retirement age in academia. I won't do this, however. Why?
(1) Many faculty (and staff, by the way) in state-supported institutions do not qualify for social security. This is so because most or all of their years of work were accrued as state employment.
(2) Many faculty (and, again, staff) have been underpaid in comparison to their peers, as a result of their fields being considered "lesser" for one reason or other and/or their institutions being considered lower in tier.
(3) Some faculty (and, yes, staff) have been forced to contribute to a state-supported retirement system that has been compromised (in Illinois, not only due to economics in general but also due to being tapped multiple times to fund other state projects). If they were already paid poorly, they may not have been able to invest elsewhere...or may not have been able to invest meaningfully.
So long as faculty (and staff) remain able to perform their functions well, in accordance with institutional/divisional/departmental expectations, the rest of us should act out of awareness of the conditions above and not enforce a mandatory retirement age. If faculty (or staff) are unable to perform their functions well, at any point during their careers, then periodic assessment should lead to their being downgraded or dismissed.
I know that as past faculty and current academic staff I am deeply affected by all three conditions identified above. As a result, I will not be able to afford to retire when some "magic number" (60-72) might come up for me. [I am 40, currently.] I cannot imagine suggesting that current older faculty and staff cede their jobs simply because it is "time" according to some bureaucratic clock.
7. the_pragmatist - August 10, 2010 at 03:56 pm
What a mistake we in higher education community made in promoting and electing this man President. He is clearly inexperienced, very partisan and incredibly dishonest. I'm not sure who will be running against him the next time around, nor whether they will earn my vote, but can tell you one thing for certain... I will not be voting for President Obama the next time around!!!
8. 11151195 - August 12, 2010 at 03:27 pm
Perhaps Jaysanderson will remind us of the posts he wrote when Laura Bush took her several overseas trips -- plus nothing whether, as with Ms. Obama, the friends paid their own way. Psuedo-royal family: ah! let's return to the days of Barbara Bush and Nancy Reagan. Let's focus on the academic issues at stake.
9. terrypruettsaid - August 17, 2010 at 10:58 am
We may need more college graduates, but I think we also need jobs and training that don't require everyone to go through a typical college curriculum to get a job. The attempt to push every student into college is demoralizing to both students and teachers.
10. skirmisher - August 19, 2010 at 12:39 pm
I applaud the President for promoting higher education! We have high school graduates that end of up remedial reading, writing and math courses at the community colleges --in droves! To get more college graduates, we need high schools to produce more college ready students.
My only complaint is that money has to be behind sending students to college - even community colleges. We need more full time faculty, more resources. Congress needs to step up to the plate and send more of the slice-of-the-pie education funds to community colleges rather than 4 year colleges. The 4-years will get the successfull graduates of community colleges.