I got this from the American Enterprise Institute
College is expensive.
I'm convinced that the ages of 18-23 are the perfect time for the college years. It's when eating ramen noodles for lunch and eating at Taco Bell for dinner is acceptable. Cheap food is what many that age would eat anyway.
But institutions of higher education do not hire young people. They hire people who arrive on campus with large amounts of debt from multiple degrees. My last higher education post paid me a salary of $34,000. That was supplemented with free WIC cheese and complimentary school lunch for my eldest. It wasn't a job worth keeping, based on that salary. I loved the work; I couldn't afford to keep doing it.
In light of that, political pressures from the left and the right are bearing down on higher education. The tuition is too high. Graduation rates are too low. It's ridiculous. You could buy a car for that amount of money. In some cases, you could buy a house.
I thought the point of higher education was to make it so you could buy the car and house with the knowledge and skills you acquire while on campus...and then buy better ones down the road. In some cases, that comes through a lucrative position in engineering. In other situations, students learn to think and act accordingly. If either or both become the case, then you see a benefit from higher education for the rest of your life.
There are ways for a family to combat the cost of higher education. Yes, there is federal student aid. Yes, some tuition discounts get applied. But coming from the side of the institution, I can honestly say a key way to cut costs is through textbooks. Textbooks are a racket.
I just caught a session on Open Education Resources at the Association of American Colleges and Universities Annual Meeting. OERs offer a no-cost way to access information, organized information. NITLE is releasing a paper on OER use at colleges. It's release comes on a CommentPress site, so have fun making any comments!
When I was finishing my doctorate, I had a professor that required students to purchase "the packet." It was a collection of handouts and specific teaching methods, photocopied and bound by a local print shop near campus. There was no publisher involved. It was written information, but it was cheap (about $6). That packet was more precious than any of the textbooks used in class. In fact, it seemed like the textbook was used as a sort of justification--"we meet some accreditation standard because we teach out of a mainline textbook." Those days are gone, as long as there is evidence the standards are met.
Today, there isn't even need for a nearby print shop. Everything can be placed online--accessible by password, if a professor so chooses. It can also be placed online by publishing companies, which leads to more exorbitant fees.
At some point in time, a professor should know what he wants his students to know, do, and be like at the end of a semester (or year). Working backward from that, it is not ridiculous to teach a course without a textbook full of reading assignments that never get completed. Instead, professors could focus on those things students will do...and create their own "textbooks." They don't have to do it alone, either. Simple applications like Boundless help organize such information. In the end, the curriculum becomes specific to the professor, not some outside textbook writer.
The textbook requirement drop? It's crucial to the Taco Bell world of student debt. Multiply this situation by 8-10 classes per year, and it means thousands of dollars.
This approach to learning materials is positive in numerous ways. It can allow professors to teach what they think is important. The information is more pertinent, and the financial relief can make the difference between staying in school or dropping. It can make private schools more affordable.
It's important that institutions explore this option and act accordingly.
The money students save could be as much as...a down payment on a house or a car.
No comments:
Post a Comment