SALON
Saturday, Mar 15, 2014 11:00 AM EDT
It might surprise you, but higher education
is actually widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots
Suzanne Mettler
In
the middle decades of the twentieth century, the United States
experienced a meteoric rise in the rate of people earning four-year
college degrees, as it soared from 6 percent of 25- to 29-year-olds in
1947 to 24 percent in 1977. During the next two decades, the percentage
remained flat. In the mid-1990s, progress resumed but at a more modest
rate; as of 2011, 32 percent of young adults had obtained bachelor’s
degrees.
As recently as the 1980s, the nation was the undisputed
international leader in the percentage of citizens graduating from
college. The baby boomers, born in the decades immediately following
World War II, pursued higher education in large numbers. Entering
college during the late 1960s and 1970s, they swelled the ranks of
college students and became the most educated members of their
generation worldwide. In 2010, 32 percent of Americans between 55 and 64
held four-year college degrees, a higher percentage than citizens in
the same age group in any other nation. (Norway claims a distant second
place, with 25 percent of its citizens in that age group as college
graduates.)
But among younger groups, the US lead has disappeared.
In 2010 Americans between 25 and 34 had a college graduation rate of 33
percent, a mere one percentage point increase over the older
generation. By contrast, young people in many other nations have
catapulted over their American counterparts.
Those who claim that
the United States is sending too many people to college discount these
global historical trends, focusing instead on data points such as how
recent college graduates have fared since the financial crisis in 2008.
Yet in fact, while 6.8 percent of them suffered unemployment during this
period, that figure pales in comparison to the 24 percent of recent
high school graduates who were jobless. The recession accentuated a
trend that has been under way for decades in the United States: the loss
of good paying jobs for low-skilled workers and the increasing demand
for highly skilled, well-educated workers. Since the early 1980s, this
development has led to the so-called wage premium for those with college
degrees. In 2010, among young adults between 25 and 40, those with
four-year college degrees earned $40,000 on average compared to $25,000
for high school graduates. Moreover, the return from a college degree
increases over an individual’s lifetime, with the gains in employment
prospects and income being only the most obvious and easily measured
benefits. one recent study focusing on income estimated that a four-year
college degree pays an average return of 15.2 percent annually—far more
than average returns in the stock market, at 6.8 percent since the
1950s; or corporate bonds, at 2.9 percent; or housing, at 0.4 percent.
Those with higher rates of education enjoy better health and longevity.
They participate in larger numbers in politics and civic life, making
their voices heard in the public sphere and providing innumerable
services to their communities. As economist Susan Dynarski testified to
the US Senate Finance Committee in 2011, “A college education is one of
the best investments a young person can make. even with record high
tuition prices, a bachelor’s degree pays for itself several times over,
in the form of higher income, lower unemployment, better health and
enhanced civic engagement. Within ten years of college graduation, the
typical BA will already have recouped the cost of her investment.”
However,
not all college degrees offer these benefits. As we will see shortly,
some institutions produce poor results for their students and interfere
with what is otherwise a clear pattern of success. In the main, however,
the evidence is quite unequivocal: the United States needs to increase
the percentage of its citizens who attain college degrees.
If we look more closely to see
who completes
college today, we find that the ranks of college graduates reinforce
income inequality. While we would expect that those from more affluent
backgrounds are likely to attain more education than those who grow up
poor, the extent of their advantage over the bottom three-quarters of
the income distribution is striking. For those who grow up in high
income families today, going to college is a routine part of life—like
getting childhood immunizations—and the vast majority of such
individuals, 71 percent, complete their bachelor’s degree in
early adulthood. Among those in the upper middle income quartile, this
same achievement, though more than twice as common as it was forty
years ago, is still relatively unusual, reaching just 30 percent. Among
Americans who have grown up in households below median income, the gains
since 1970 have been meager: those in the lower middle quartile have
increased their graduation rates from just 11 to 15 percent, and among
those in the poorest group, from 6 to 10 percent. All told, degree
attainment among upper income households so dramatically outpaces that
of low and middle income people that the percentage who obtain diplomas
among the top income quartile is greater than that of the other three
quartiles
combined. Our system of higher education not only
fails to mitigate inequality but it exacerbates it, creating a deeply
stratified society.
The unimpressive gains in graduation rates for
most Americans have occurred despite the fact that access to college
being admitted and then enrolling has improved dramatically over time,
including among the least advantaged. Increasing enrollment is in part
attributable to sharp increases in high school graduation rates,
particularly among lower income groups, as many more now possess the
necessary qualifications for higher education. In 2010, 83 percent of
all 18- to 24-year-olds had earned a high school diploma or equivalent
certification, and this included 73 percent of those in the bottom
quartile, a nearly 20 percent improvement since 1970. Once individuals
graduate from high school, most of them now continue on to college, 75
percent of 18- to 24-year-olds as of 2010. Here again, the
biggest recent gains have been made in low income groups. Among
students who enroll, however, completion rates by age 24 hover at
only 47 percent. In effect, more students are starting college but they
not graduating. Here economic inequality becomes apparent: nearly all
of those from the highest income group who start college, 97
percent gain diplomas by age 24, a stunning improvement of 42 percentage
points since 1970, compared to just 23 percent of those in the bottom
quartile, a mere one percentage point improvement over the same period.
Those in the second quartile fared little better, with only 26 percent
reaching graduation by age 24; and even in the third quartile, just over
half (51 percent) completed degrees in a timely fashion.
In short, completing college, or at least doing so promptly, eludes most young people from low and moderate income backgrounds.
Such
outcomes may appear, at first blush, to indicate that our
societal emphasis on the importance of college is misplaced. Certainly
college is not for everyone and it should not be viewed as the only
acceptable path following high school. The United States could do a far
better job of linking those who are not college bound with jobs, a point
made by James E. Rosenbaum in his insightful book, ‘Beyond College for
All.” But others who criticize calls for increased college attainment
insinuate that those who fail to enroll or fail to complete college are
simply not motivated. “School bores and bothers them,” writes Robert
Samuelson.
Richard Vedder claims that “college graduates, on
average, are smarter and more disciplined and dependable than high
school graduates.” Without a doubt, the nation could do better by those
who do not have an interest in or aptitude for college. however, the
implication that less advantaged students fail to graduate owing to a
lack of motivation or incompetence misses the mark. When we look closely
at the link between income and college graduation, we find that more is
at play.
Certainly young people from higher socioeconomic
backgrounds are typically better positioned to excel in the
prerequisites for college admission and success. They are more likely to
attend better primary and secondary schools. Their parents invest
heavily in providing enriching extracurricular opportunities, including
music lessons, travel, summer camps, and so forth. Not surprisingly,
they earn higher grades and do better on standardized tests than those
who grow up without such privileges. Yet scholars have found that even
among individuals with the
same academic credentials, those
from less advantaged families are less likely to gain college
degrees. Of students with high test scores, the vast majority from the
highest income group graduate, while just over half of those in the
middle income group and just a small majority of the rest manage to
complete college. In fact, the college graduation rates of high-scoring
low income individuals, at 30 percent, barely surpass those of
low-scoring high income individuals, at 29 percent. Among students who
enroll, attrition occurs most dramatically among those from families
below median income. Clearly there must be something else going on here
other than the weeding out of the unqualified and unmotivated.
In
fact, ample evidence reveals that neither changes in college
readiness nor shifts in the demographic characteristics of college
students go very far to explain the unimpressive college graduation
rates. A rigorous study by a group of economists, for example, found
that rising tuition in public sector colleges bears most of the blame
for this development. In addition, it shows that rising costs compel
more students to work longer hours to finance their education, which
makes it difficult for them to carry enough credits to graduate in a
timely manner, if at all. Illustrating these trends, in 2013 students at
Central Connecticut state university braced themselves for a 4.1
percent increase in tuition and fees—$19,897 per year for those who live
on campus. Amber Pietrycha, a junior, already works two jobs per
semester on average in order to make ends meet.
“Eight hundred
bucks for me will bring it close to the line where I’m not entirely sure
I could do it,” she said. Sophomore Salam Measho agreed, explaining
that the increase “means I’m going to have to work more hours on
weekends back home. That means less time studying. That’s too much of a
strain on myself.” These developments are not inevitable, as
demonstrated by a special program at the University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill that provided extra financial support to low income
students, and significantly boosted their graduation rates.
Not
long ago, the United States led the world in promoting higher education
for its citizens, spurring social mobility in the process. Many who grew
up during the middle decades of the twentieth century became the first
in their families to go to college. Many were assisted by generous GI
bill benefits or Pell grants, and all had access to public universities
and colleges with affordable tuition. Their lives were often transformed
as they gained jobs, income, and opportunities to participate in public
life that had been beyond the reach of their parents.
Today,
however, the United States has evolved into an international outlier for
its lack of such mobility. A group of researchers compared ten
countries in terms of the quality of children’s lives on
multiple dimensions-economic status, educational attainment,
socioemotional well-being, and so forth—and found that in the United
States quality of life was more determined by parents’ level of
education than in any of the other countries investigated. In fact, the
single most powerful relationship they detected was between the
educational level of American parents and the subsequent level of
education attained by their children: more than anywhere else, the vast
majority of children fortunate to be born to highly educated parents
acquired high levels of education, and conversely, the children of those
with little education were penalized by receiving little education.
They concluded that the United States is “the country with the least
intergenerational mobility and the least equal opportunity for children
to advance.” For those who are left behind, the consequences are severe.
As recently as 1980, a male with a college degree earned about 20
percent more on average than one with a high school degree; by 2011, the
difference had grown to 45 percent.
Citizens of the United States
cherish the ideals of social mobility and opportunity that are widely
associated with the “American Dream.” Many consider the chance to attend
and graduate from college as both an end in itself—a manifestation of
that ideal—and a crucial means toward its fuller realization over the
course of a lifetime. In the middle of the twentieth century, federal
student aid policies and public support of state-run colleges and
universities helped make a college education possible for growing
numbers of individuals across the income spectrum.
Now, more
individuals than ever from every income group pursue a college
education. But for most of those who do from the bottom half of the
income spectrum, the effort proves futile. Their greatest obstacle to
completing a four-year degree is not lack of ability or motivation,
but insufficient financial support. As nearly all of those in the most
affluent quarter of the population earn their diplomas in short order
and reap the benefits of doing so, social stratification becomes more
deeply entrenched.
For those who born into modest means, the gaps that separate them from the upper echelon grow increasingly insurmountable.
Excerpted with permission from “Degrees of Inequality: How the Politics of Higher Education Sabotaged the American Dream” by Suzanne Mettler. Available from Basic Books, a member of The Perseus Books Group. Copyright © 2014.
No comments:
Post a Comment