What's Wrong With American Higher Education?

Most Americans believe that a college education is a prerequisite to financial success. According to a study conducted by Sallie Mae, 84 percent of students strongly agreed that higher education was an investment in their future. When asked if they would attend college solely for the experience -- despite future earnings -- only 32 percent strongly agreed that they would.

But the assumption that a college education is a ticket to economic stability, rather than simply an opportunity to grow intellectually, is a recent one.

American higher education was initially based on the traditional English university, but was transformed into an entirely different beast with the introduction of the Morrill Act of 1862 – nearly two centuries after the first colleges were founded in the U.S. The first Morrill Act designated public land for universities teaching agriculture and mechanic arts, marking the first time public funding would be allocated to higher education.

If the Morrill Act introduced higher education as a means of providing better financial opportunities to the American public, the 1944 G.I. Bill solidified the concept by making higher education a staple of the American dream: Returning veterans could look forward to a finding a wife, owning a home, and earning a college degree.

In 1950, 2.6 million Americans – less than two percent of the population – were enrolled in college. By 1990, the number of Americans in college had jumped to 13.2 million, or more than five percent of the overall population. And between 1997 and 2007, undergraduate enrollment rose by 25 percent.

According to Professor Jane Robbins, who studies the development and societal role of the university in America, “there’s just been enormous changes [in the structure of the university] – not [ones that were] necessarily chosen, but rather accepted, allowed, and evolved” She added that such reactionary change has lead to unmitigated, unexpected, and often unexamined growth.

And, she says, this type of unintentional growth has lead to a system that is both rife with inefficiencies and extremely powerful.

In an attempt to begin to pinpoint the problems within American higher education, the Huffington Post spoke with a number of professors specializing in problematic areas in U.S. universities and colleges. When asked to identify the main problem with higher education and offer a possible solution, each said that this was impossible – the system is too large and the complications too intricate to pare down to one cause. But certain points were brought up repeatedly throughout these conversations, and begin to paint a picture of what is wrong with American higher education.

Check out ten of the greatest challenges facing American institutions of higher learning today -- and possible ways to begin to correct them, as identified by the professors listed below.

Claudia Dreifus co-wrote Higher Education?: How Colleges Are Wasting Our Money and Failing Our Kids---and What We Can Do About It

Andrew Hacker co-wrote Higher Education?: How Colleges Are Wasting Our Money and Failing Our Kids---and What We Can Do About It

Sigal Alon studies inequality of access in higher education

Lori Patton studies multiculturalism, diversity and race inequality in higher education

Mark C. Taylor wrote Crisis on Campus: A Bold Plan for Reforming Our Colleges and Universities

Jane Robbins studies the theory of the American research university

Alicia Dowd studies finance equity in higher education. She currently serves as co-director of the Center for Urban Education.

What do you think of this list? Let us know in the comments section.

1 of 10

Focus on Elite Institutions

1 of 11

First Slide

Previous Slide

@

Harvard University, voted most prestigious university in the world, accepted 6.2 percent of applicants this year. Claudia Dreifus: We're trying to say to people, whatever an education costs -- it's not worth indebting yourself for status. And a lot of people, for instance, go to private colleges rather than state schools for the status they think is going to be conferred on them. In those cases, I mean if there's a choice between City College and Pace, or St. John's, why should a working class family indebt themselves for that? But, the whole system is built on a premise of status and hierarchy. It's profoundly undemocratic...instead of being a system that creates more democracy through knowledge, it's a system that's creating more striation. Those schools, the prestige schools, are so unbelievably rich...Harvard, even with that hit in its endowment, could become a real meritocracy and give out scholarships to everyone it admits. Which I actually think is a great idea. I love Cooper Union, and I love the students I met from Cooper because they were the only students I met who didn't have this incredible stone on their chest of student debt. They could look at their future and just imagine really creative things. Sigal Alon: There is enough supply [of postsecondary institutions] if you look at the entire postsecondary system, but the problem is that everybody wants to go to the most selective institutions...so the crunch is very specific to a few institutions. Now the question is, what can we do to make the other institutions more attractive?

Fortune 500 CEOs: Which Universities Did They Get Their Degress From?

gadgets/slideshows/27592/slide_27592_286066_small.jpg

Robert Fisher's Musical Commencement Speech To Belmont University

Glee's Jane Lynch Gets Personal In Smith's Commencement Address

2012 College Grads Enter Improving Job Market

The Shoes of Lynn's 2012 Commencement

So Long and Thanks for All the Gray Hairs

Harvard University, voted most prestigious university in the world, accepted 6.2 percent of applicants this year.

Claudia Dreifus: We're trying to say to people, whatever an education costs -- it's not worth indebting yourself for status. And a lot of people, for instance, go to private colleges rather than state schools for the status they think is going to be conferred on them. In those cases, I mean if there's a choice between City College and Pace, or St. John's, why should a working class family indebt themselves for that? But, the whole system is built on a premise of status and hierarchy. It's profoundly undemocratic...instead of being a system that creates more democracy through knowledge, it's a system that's creating more striation.

Those schools, the prestige schools, are so unbelievably rich...Harvard, even with that hit in its endowment, could become a real meritocracy and give out scholarships to everyone it admits. Which I actually think is a great idea. I love Cooper Union, and I love the students I met from Cooper because they were the only students I met who didn't have this incredible stone on their chest of student debt. They could look at their future and just imagine really creative things.

Sigal Alon: There is enough supply [of postsecondary institutions] if you look at the entire postsecondary system, but the problem is that everybody wants to go to the most selective institutions...so the crunch is very specific to a few institutions. Now the question is, what can we do to make the other institutions more attractive?

comments(537)

Total comments: 537 | Post a Comment

1 of 11

Rate This Slide

Rank #2  |  Average: 4

No big deal Problematic

• 
  1
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9
• 
  10

Current Top 5 Slides

loading...

Choose your Top 5 Slides

UserName

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Top User Slides

← Prev|Next →

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Users who voted on this slide

← Prev|Next →

loading...

Comments

[REDSTATEREFUGEE]

10:41 AM on 06/08/2011

According to a Michigan study a few years ago, there is a 50% attrition rate for freshmen in community colleges across the nation. While there are sometimes unavoidable reasons for dropping out before entering the sophomore year of CC, IMHO, most of the withdrawals are due to individual factors like lack of self-discipline, nominal organizational skills, failure to set goals, lack of study skills, etc.

In each of my freshman comp classes, at the beginning of each course, I include brief sessions on college survival, time management, organizing for weekly objectives, and long range goal setting. Even so, when a student submits a late paper, I routinely ask him/her, "Do you possess and use regularly a day planner?" The answer is usually, "No."

[profideous man]

02:52 PM on 06/06/2011

What's wrong with it? Watered down entrance requirements, grade inflation, and administrations that have no practical experience in education who would rather water down entrance requirements and inflate grades in order to get the proverbial "fat cash."

[6p023E23]

12:53 AM on 06/04/2011

Mark C. Taylor: Standardized test are biased. The unfortunate part is that institutions still rely heavily on them, which limits access for students of color.

Typical Bull$hit.

[Doode1]

08:21 AM on 06/04/2011

Oh my Goodness - I cannot believe these idiots keep rejecting their reality to substitute with their own. I bought an SAT book and studied it myself - no prep courses. Did it during the summer - everyone can do it for a price of $20/book.

Why are these people being taken seriously and given time???

[6p023E23]

12:43 PM on 06/04/2011

Tell me about it.
oh you know, they are soooo educated, and intelligent, and "I know more than you" elitists.

[awtang]

12:51 AM on 06/06/2011

I did almost the exact same thing: Except I borrowed mine from the library and saved $20. I admit most of these ideas are too idealistic. Eliminating ratings? Of course, everyone wants to go to the best school. Why would you not? But other practical notions, such as accountability, that I agree with. My school is building a conference hotel. A hotel, owned by the school, in an area that is metropolitan and already littered with dozens of hotels. Really?

[SangZe]

09:03 AM on 05/30/2011

A college education has become meaningless. Colleges are little more than expensive trade schools. They do not educate. They teach marketable skills and little more. The result is an ignorant electorate that bows down without question to the corporations who own it.

[profideous man]

03:08 PM on 06/06/2011

Even calling them trade schools gives them more credit than is due. At least people learn actual marketable skills in real trade and tech schools. Universities don't do that.

[armstrong st]

01:50 PM on 05/29/2011

According to the article "Most Americans believe that a college education is a prerequisite to financial success." But is it really the best investment a student should be looking forward considering how much debt he/she will have after graduation? Considering the present job market, a student shouldn't rely any longer on getting a well-paid job that will help pay off all the debt. Instead, it's better to think of your own business while in college and rely only on oneself.

Steve from www.essaytask.com

[Molly Zelvonberg]

02:35 AM on 05/29/2011

Yea, basically no comment because there is a fear that they will be called on it. There are so many problems with higher education but it would have been interesting to hear at least one major one.

Too much money and too little education

[Pete Evans]

01:50 PM on 05/23/2011

all wrong - lax accreditation standards. accrediting gets you financial aid, financial aid is the treasure chest. regional accreditation and it's bureaus - school's like 'the art institute' have equal accreditation to 'princeton'. on paper, in the bureaus eyes, these schools should transfer credits (although i doubt that ever happens in practice).

eerily similar to junk subprime mortgages being packaged and given stellar bond ratings only to go bust

[gropius09]

02:05 PM on 05/19/2011

"What's wrong with American higher education" is that it no longer exists - our colleges and universities have become glorified trade schools that no longer teach the critical thinking skills required for leadership in any field, and instead have been programmed to churn out obedient employees. Granted, this is partly the fault of the students themselves, who, thanks to the ubiquity of technology, have come to believe that there is an answer to every question somewhere on the internet. But it is also due to a growing and pervasive anti-intellectual attitude in the entire U.S. culture, which has come to recognize wealth as the only desirable goal in life; therefore, the only things worth teaching at the university level are job skills. It is an interesting irony that while President Barack Obama had to release his birth certificate in order to prove his U.S. citizenship, he has to be more reticent about his considerable academic credentials, to avoid being branded an "intellectual."

[dharmadhatuzoo]

09:13 AM on 05/20/2011

I pretty much agree with you, but you know hardly anyone else does, right? Most people would have us focus much much more on everything but the liberal arts, and consider people like you and I to be crazy. Such has been my experience.

[lisakaz2]

03:24 AM on 05/27/2011

I sure have tried to stimulate critical thinking skills but what you say is true about the lack of interest or propensity to think the internet gives out the answers. A few times I have seen a lack of skills coupled with a lack of a work ethic -- it is a deadly combination.

[uniquindividual]

06:46 PM on 05/17/2011

Stop the practise of legacy admissions - Yale and Harvard are a joke.


"Dear Governor and President-in-Waiting Bush:

This has to be the first time in our history that a candidate who is losing BOTH the popular vote AND the electoral vote insists on being anointed President of the United States.

I can understand why you expect this title to be yours. You have spent your entire life having everything handed to you. You have never had to earn your place. Money and name alone have opened every door for you. Without effort or hard work or intelligence or ingenuity, you have been bequeathed a life of privilege.

You learned at an early age that, in America, all someone like you has to do is show up. You found yourself admitted to a wealthy New England boarding school simply because your name was Bush. You did not have to EARN your place there. It was bought for you.

You then learned you could get into Yale with a "C" average. Other, more deserving, students who had worked hard for 12 years to earn their place at Yale were denied admittance. You got in because your name was Bush.

You got into Harvard the same way. After screwing off during your four years at Yale -- and maintaining your "C" average -- you took someone's else's seat at Harvard, a seat that they had EARNED."

Michael Moore

[Cookie Monsta]

03:29 PM on 05/23/2011

After convincing the average man of the 1770s that inherited political power was the equivalence of Tyranny, the founding fathers succeeded in an even more astounding bit of political persuasion, convincing the exact same people that inherited WEALTH was the equivalence of Freedom.

[sempronia]

02:17 PM on 06/03/2011

I'm a Penn legacy kid, but I worked my butt off and graduated Magna.

I generally agree with you -- in fact, feel very passionate about the matter: I knew quite a few legacy students who were complete morons, but who would throw their parents' money around as though they had earned it themselves. Some of us are lucky enough to have advantages from our parents: my parents saved for years to so that I wouldn't have to deal with school debt, and I did take advantage of the "special" alumni interview during the admissions process. Nevertheless, I feel very strongly that my parents' accomplishments are not my own, and that their efforts should be honored by hard work and excellence, and, in my case, trying to excel in a field where my parents have no professional ties. The idea that George Bush is the poster child for Ivy legacy kids is appalling but in many ways accurate, and it lowers the overall value of the degree for all of us who graduate. This last part is a damned shame, because the more time I spend at other universities, the more appreciate the education I received at Penn.

I suppose this classism is nothing new, but I've seen in a number of places among fellow 20-somethings, and I find myself put off by how much it clashes with the meritocratic ideals my parents passed on to me, along with the education funds.

[constitutional 1]

11:03 AM on 05/17/2011

"The function of the university is to seek and to transmit knowledge and to train students in the processes whereby truth is to be made known. To convert, or to make converts, is alien and hostile to this dispassionate duty. Where it becomes necessary in performing this function of a university, to consider political, social, or sectarian movements, they are dissected and examined, not taught, and the conclusion left, with no tipping of the scales, to the logic of the facts..Essentially the freedom of a university is the freedom of competent persons in the classroom. In order to protect this freedom, the University assumed the right to prevent exploitation of its prestige by unqualified persons or by those who would use it as a platform for propaganda."

UC President Robert Gordon Sproul 1934

[tksensei]

03:31 AM on 05/15/2011

"What's wrong" needs to be considered with the fact that US higher education is by far the best in the world in mind.

[Cookie Monsta]

02:38 PM on 05/23/2011

Right. Look, just because it's in America does not mean it is automatically the best. Having a diploma is no guaranty that one learned anything. If you pay your tuition and do your homework, you pass. There may be a few ethical professors who will fail a student if they don't know the work at all but, mostly, if you can answer 6 out of 10 questions with something relevant, you get a D and you get a diploma. We are not falling behind the rest of the developed world because our schools are 'by far the best in the world'. Might I suggest that you put down the flag and take a good look around.

[lisakaz2]

03:28 AM on 05/27/2011

You're joking? Ever seen college students in other countries?

[sempronia]

02:20 PM on 06/03/2011

Yes, when they come over here and, within our own system, kick the American kids' butts.

[MikeyJaii]

10:47 PM on 05/14/2011

This video, will tell you what's wrong. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpZtX32sKVE&feature=feedlik

[Ladyrantsalot]

09:19 PM on 05/13/2011

It's true that, at the elite schools, the administrations do not value good teaching. Oh, they say they do. And they fund these "teaching center" Potemkin villages and hand out teaching awards. But the only path to getting and keeping a job and getting a decent raise is through publications, the more the better. Most of the scholars I know are committed teachers, but the system is designed to make them feel awful if they spend a lot of time on teaching and advising-related tasks. Back to grading......

[ForStudentPower]

01:29 PM on 05/13/2011

As public funding for higher ed started drying up in the 1970s and 80s, corporate dollars started filling in the gaps. So now we have universities with Boards and Presidents who are not veteran professors, but CEOs of banks, law firms, and defense contractors.

Big surprise that as the logic of the market is introduced into a system whose values conflict with that of profit and efficiency, we see: the destruction of shared governance; the decay of academic freedom; and the increased exploitation of professors (especially adjuncts), students (especially grad students), and support staff.

Until we restore real decision-making power to those who actually live, work, and learn there (instead of rich ideologues like the Koch brothers), we'll continue to see the hollowing out of a system that once boasted the finest universities in the world.

[Molly Zelvonberg]

02:37 AM on 05/29/2011

Very interesting point

[reluctantWASP]

12:49 AM on 05/11/2011

I think the biggest problem with higher education is the constantly increasing self aggrandizement of the University tenured faculty. Many of these people are amazingly self important and rudely arrogant. On top of all of this, students are often expected to buy overpriced text books for classes taught by the professors who author these books. If this is not a prime example of conflict of interest, I don't know what is. Universities need to revamp the entire tenure structure to bring faculty in line with other educational professionals.

[bccmeteorites]

05:11 AM on 05/13/2011

Many of these people are amazingly self important and rudely arrogant and it leads to unchecked systematic abuse.

http://www.bccmeteorites.com/misconduct-planetary.html

[Ladyrantsalot]

09:14 PM on 05/13/2011

The status of today's tenured faculty cannot be compared to those of the old professoriat. In the old days, the boys had personal secretaries. Secretaries typed their manuscripts and mimeographed their syllabi. And getting a job and tenure were a breeze--as long as you went to the right schools and were a white man. All that has changed. Getting tenure is a hellish experience. Some tenured faculty are arrogant, but I don't think that is true generally.