Tougher regulations of the for-profits, long overdue, are the quickest way to help the poorest Americans who seek college degrees. States, too, should be held accountable; a perverse incentive permits them to gain more in federal student aid if they commit less of their own resources to helping poorer students. Nonprofit schools must also be responsible partners with government in furthering opportunity. Lawmakers should curtail the money we spend on tuition tax policies and for-profits, and invest more in Pell grants and community colleges.
She views the problem in higher education as one of distribution. In Three Languages of Politics terms, she implies that for-profit schools and conservative politicians are the oppressors, and lower-income youth are the oppressed.
My own view is that we are sending many students to college who are not prepared for the traditional liberal-arts college. From a public policy perspective, this is banging your head against the wall. I would not defend current policy in higher education, but I think that investing more in Pell grants and community colleges would not lead to different results.
Pointer from Mark Thoma.
I suppose the proper narrative subsidies helping so-called for profits get off the ground takes money away from subsidies helping poor students getting off the ground.
I still don’t get exactly how they justify the current positional good bias of higher Ed.
As in, how does oppressor thinking get us exactly what they should hate with the status treadmill in education and billion dollar endowments and cost spirals and college rank determinism.
Pell grants are a waste – very poor graduation rates in unproductive majors
IMO we should start by asking what skills and knowledge could help these people (the poorest Americans who might seek college degrees) live a better life and what is the most efficient way to get those to them. Also we need to think about how to get them credentials for what they learn.