Book Futures

Good posting with many interesting points. The financial/economic part of the story is of course different in different places. Here in Norway, there is no tuition (also not for foreign students), so that challenge is somewhat different — but not so much. Many European countries now charge tuition for foreign students; this is sure to come in Norway, too. And from there, it’s a smaller step to charging those who are here already. Who knows how that will go? But it’s clear that the funding model here, which is based on numbers of students, is very bad for the liberal arts, and is leading to closing after closing … 
I wrote about this a little in:
What happens when we have no students?

http://curt-rice.com/2011/11/26/what-happens-when-we-have-no-students/

Liberal arts colleges are not the only entities to suffer from a remarkable degree of self-absorption. Our students tend to be entirely self-absorbed as well. So how should we respond? Collaboration is certainly one way to meet the challenge, and the collaborative methods suggested are legitimate. However, let us be aware of the need to connect to our students. Our students should also have the opportunity to collaborate, and I suggest that collaborative efforts be made with service learning opportunities. Service learning connects students to their communities, and as population demographics change I believe we need to be aware of an increasing need to connect with the community. Of course I bemoan the apparent loss of respect for the Liberal Arts, which form the foundations of our civilization. What if, one day, no one reads Plato, or Shakespeare, or …. oh, but almost no one does now, right? At least among many of our students. Perhaps that’s presumptious. But we’ll survive: perhaps LA scholars will be hurled into  some far-off corner of the galaxy to discuss the fine points of something or other. But for now, let’s help our students develop strong, constructive critical thinking skills by collaborating with their community resources. Within the university system they can construct problem/solution groups across the disciplines, putting feet to their dreams and making positive changes that will impact their families, their work environments, and their living environments. This may bring about an actual resurgence of interest in the Liberal Arts, as they connect to art, music, literature and those social opportunities that are such a strong aspects of service learning.

 ”The opportunity problem is that corporate America has decided not to
train its employees anymore, and has passed that chore off to higher
education.” Bingo. Yet one more way in which the corporations have figured out how to socialize risk and the cost of doing business. Corps. whine that they can’t find people with the skills to fill their open positions, even while they sit on trillions of dollars that, in part, could go to training their workforce (as was done for years in days gone by when the economy was, you know, _growing_).

herter, “Arum and Roksa’s second report illustrates the lack of added value of SAT and High Selectivity college.

‘Less Selective’ colleges have the highest full-time employment rate with only a slightly lower full-time employment income than the ‘Highly Selective’ colleges!  $32,419 vs $32,740 so less than a 1% discount on ‘Highly Selective’! 

This is even more pathetic given all the job finding advantages in networks etc.
that are described in the report.”

Have a look at http://chronicle.com/article/Harvard-by-Lottery/131322/#comment-483743415
among several of my posts in the “Harvard by Lottery” thread.

The Arum and Roksa report doesn’t say what institutions are part of the survey but there is a consistent pattern showing that it is your major that counts. See the tables in the reports with the various stats that show that high CLA scores are at best worthless but maybe bad for you.  Selectivity and SAT as shown above are bad for you.  Non-vocational majors are bad for  you.  If  you look at the numbers, instead of the commentary in the report or in the CHE, you will see that it is quite damning.

Another damning study:

“The 2011 paper by Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger has this shocking finding:

‘Indeed, the finding that the average SAT score of the highest ranked school
that rejected a student is a much stronger predictor of that student’s subsequent earnings than the average SAT score of the school the student actually attended should give pause to those who interpret conventional regression-based estimates of the effect of college characteristics as causal effects of the colleges themselves.’

Note that it is the average SAT of the highest ranked of the REJECTING schools that ‘is a much stronger predictor’ [>2x] of earnings than the average SAT of the school attended!”

To see more, including the link to the study:
http://chronicle.com/article/Harvard-by-Lottery/131322/#comment-483942700

THANK YOU PRES WEISS: “The market is happening to us” is the most realistic acknowledgement that the stewardship paradigm has shifted in highered.  Please LEAD DON’T REACT

herter, you are right that I didn’t answer your particular question, I answered with data I was aware of that seemed related to your question. 

Often with such studies the participants are hidden, as with Arum and Roksa.  The 2011 paper by Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger does have a footnote which includes one of the places in your list, Wesleyan University, though it should be noted it is going back to students 20 years or more ago:

“The 21 C&B schools included in the 1989 survey were: Bryn Mawr College, Duke University, Georgetown University, Kenyon College, Miami University of Ohio, Morehouse College, Oberlin College Penn State University, Princeton University, Stanford University, University of Michigan, University of Notre Dame, University of North Carolina, University of Pennsylvania, Vanderbilt University, Washington University, Wellesley College, Wesleyan University, Williams College, Xavier University, and Yale University”

Arum and Roksa have recent data, which of course, represents only a sample of graduates from unspecified colleges, who might not include those “wandering the streets,” who might not want to advertise their problems.

herter, there is also the problem that if you are in the wrong category you face employment limitations.  At the beginning of the 1959 film, “The Best of Everything.”  The typing pool head is a gum chewing grad of a business school, with a Brooklyn accent that suggests it wasn’t a prestigious school.  She reads white-gloved applicant’s qualifications:

“‘Dictation:
120 words a minute.’
- Not bad. What college? Vassar?”

The applicant answers: “Radcliffe”.

Even so the applicant takes the typing test, does well and is hired.

herter, you wrote, “#17 ain’t bad” in reference to Lafayette College and the PayScale data.  Did you notice that  Wesleyan trailed badly at 45 and the rest in the list didn’t make the top 50? The Colorado School of Mines (#20) also beat Wesleyan.

In addition to the question of self-reported web survey data, the 30 year ROI column illustrates that the data spans 30 years worth of graduates. Things have change quite a bit for current grads. The methodology article states:

“Only full-time employees who work in the U.S. were used for this analysis; self-employed, project-based, and contract employees were not. Graduates with advanced degrees were excluded.”

herter, well, since I answered several posts ago, “herter, you are right that I didn’t answer your particular question, I answered with data I was aware of that seemed related to your question. 

Often with such studies the participants are hidden . . .”

I am surprised at your expectations.

You wrote most recently, “You still have not answered the question,” yes, that is true, I didn’t claim otherwise.  I am just providing the data I am aware of that relates to the question and that is at least suggestive of some issues.

You also wrote, “You’re basically saying that all the graduates of liberal arts colleges are unemployed.  That’s patently absurd.”  No, that is not true, I referenced the work of others and in the case of the WSJ I made reference to the results of their survey of the ranks by corporate recruiters, to support the view that some employers have such preferences and their reasons.  I also indicated some of the problems with obtaining full and complete and non-misleading employment data (an issue that comes up with law schools).  

You wrote, “Adjuncting also has nothing to do with the the employment prospects of graduates of liberal arts colleges.”  I have seen repeated references in the CHE to the plight of adjuncts, especially Humanities adjuncts.  Of course, they have graduate degrees but they had to get an undergrad degree somewhere. There is also the repeated claim that undergrads who fail to find meaningful employment consider going to grad or professional school.

I was more impressed by the Colorado School of Mines at #20.

If you have certified and audited “gainful employment” data for each of the colleges you referenced then please post the URL. As I read in articles in the CHE the accuracy of employment information is much questioned, especially for law schools. I got the impression that a judge dismissed a lawsuit because it was unreasonable to rely on data provided by a law school.

As a side note, “Inside Higher Education” has an interesting article on research into the influence of foundations like Lumina and Gates on education and the shift to influencing government policy through various mechanisms.
 
This comment by Unemployed_Northeastern, in that thread, provides very interesting background on the Lumina Foundation:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/04/13/study-assesses-how-megafoundations-have-changed-role-higher-ed-philanthropy#comment-496604979