←back to thread

A university president makes a case against cowardice

(www.newyorker.com)
451 points pseudolus | 2 comments | 03 Apr 25 12:29 UTC | HN request time: 0.413s | source
Show context
sequoia ◴[03 Apr 25 13:52 UTC] No.43569673[source]▶
A lot of Americans support these attacks on universities. Why do people harbour this much animosity towards these institutions? Is there anything they could have done differently in the past decade or two to have broader sympathy now, or is people's ambivalence towards elite universities 100% irrational?
replies(25): >>43569757 #>>43569818 #>>43570019 #>>43570075 #>>43570155 #>>43570204 #>>43570446 #>>43570539 #>>43574782 #>>43574858 #>>43575315 #>>43575659 #>>43576210 #>>43576225 #>>43577611 #>>43577837 #>>43577843 #>>43578372 #>>43578566 #>>43579373 #>>43580638 #>>43581074 #>>43581904 #>>43584634 #>>43585161 #
disambiguation ◴[03 Apr 25 14:42 UTC] No.43570446[source]▶
The political and ideological divide speaks for itself, but on behalf of the common folk universities have been failing their core mission - to provide the people with a quality education. The inversion and disconnect between the cost of tuition and economic outcomes is stunning. Too many kids who don't know better are pressured into pursuing higher education and taking on massive debt, only to graduate without any job prospects or reasonable hopes of paying off their loans. The salt in the wounds is that universities are flush with cash, yet its spent on anything and everything except for the welfare of the students.
replies(5): >>43574779 #>>43574911 #>>43576276 #>>43578166 #>>43579522 #
taeric ◴[03 Apr 25 22:33 UTC] No.43576276[source]▶
Have they been failing at their core missions, though? You say there has been an inversion/disconnect between cost of tuition and economic outcomes, but looking at the data doesn't back that. At least, I have yet to see anything that supports an inversion. Diminished returns maybe. Certainly a good case to not take out loans to get into school if you don't have a reasonable chance of graduation.

But that is true of everything we do loans for, nowadays. The amount of consumer debt that people contort themselves into justifying is insane. If you want to use that as evidence that grade schools are failing in education, I can largely agree with you.

replies(1): >>43584887 #
disambiguation ◴[04 Apr 25 16:43 UTC] No.43584887[source]▶
Tuition is skyrocketing and wages are stagnant. I'm not making a hard claim about inversion of ROI, but I don't need to. What's the reason for college becoming so expensive?
replies(1): >>43585434 #
taeric ◴[04 Apr 25 17:28 UTC] No.43585434[source]▶
You claim it is inverted. That is a hard claim, full stop. One that is, notably, not supported by any figures.

I can largely agree that it, similar to other things, has become too expensive. I cannot agree that it is not worth it for folks that can do it.

replies(1): >>43585643 #
1. disambiguation ◴[04 Apr 25 17:46 UTC] No.43585643[source]▶
You know it's kind of rude to dismiss someone when they clarify and then stuff words in their mouth?

Totally inverted? Of course not. But there is a very real portion of individuals for whom debts exceed earnings and it is very much in the data. But if you want to ignore reality to win on semantics go right ahead.

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-relationship-between-...

replies(1): >>43585784 #
2. taeric ◴[04 Apr 25 17:59 UTC] No.43585784[source]▶
I'm not dismissing, I'm pointing out that you made a hard claim, even if you didn't intend it.

Again, I can agree if you are claiming it is of diminishing benefits. I'll go further and agree that there have been predatory practices to get people to take out loans they shouldn't take out. This is directly addressed by your source. Which, notably, still supports that people have higher incomes after graduation.

What I cannot at all agree with is it being "inverted." Nor can I agree that they are failing to educate people. By the stats I have seen, this just isn't the case.