Posts
Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff has announced that easing access to post-secondary education will be in his party’s platform in the next election. The importance of post-secondary education is something that we hear a lot about. It is suppose to be the vehicle in which Canada’s youth will learn the skills they need to succeed in the work place. So it appears reasonable policy to encourage more people to attend university or college.
The problem is that lowering the cost is also lowering the value of attending post-secondary institutions.
Two years ago when I was still an undergraduate student I noticed a phenomenon among some of my fellow students that I refer to as the Nothingbettertodo Syndrome.
Personally I was passionate about politics and history and so I tackled those topics in University with excitement and energy. But I was a rarity. Most of my peers when asked why they were taking a course would shrug and confess that they weren’t good at math and they didn’t know what else to do. They had no goals of achieving skills or knowledge; they were not really accomplishing anything by investing into their education.
The Nothingbettertodo Syndrome isn’t felt purely in the arts either. You can find the rudderless in the student body of every program in every College or University. There are some that have specific goals but many are simply there to avoid making decisions about long term career goals.
You might think that there is nothing wrong with that. You may consider that there is nothing reprehensible about sitting back drinking a beer while you read online summaries of Plato’s Republic and think about what you want to be someday. You may think that and actually I agree with you.
There isn’t really anything inherently wrong with the Nothingbettertodo Syndrome. As long as you are able to afford it on your own or with your parent’s help, go ahead do as you will. The problem comes when you are expecting taxpayers to subsidies your indecision and this is what happens when the government artificially lowers the cost of attending university or college.
Young people suffering from the Nothingbettertodo Syndrome are a lot more likely to go to post-secondary if it is cheaper. They will occupy a seat in the classroom and scratch out Cs between games of beer pong. Then they will leave with a degree or diploma and employers would have no way of distinguishing between these lackluster students and graduates that made a real effort to learn the skills that their diploma implies.
Employers will then see less value in hiring someone with a degree or diploma, thus undermining the whole reason most students went to school in the first place.
The reality is that not everyone should go to college. Not everyone will gain any value out of going to university. By insisting that everyone should have access and lowering costs Michael Ignatieff would undermine the post-secondary education system. But by forcing students to pay the full cost of their education you ensure that we are filling schools students that truly want or need that education.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Another Liberal social program: university. Why not make it free, then we could be just like Finland which has the most highly educated un/underemployed in the world.
Thank you Mr. Nincompoopieff, for another fine display of your economic illiteracy.
"Thank you Mr. Nincompoopieff ..."
That's too funny!
Ignatieff wont be around for the next election.
Say goodnight and turn out the lights.
Simply unbelievable.
Just because people may not be interested in some courses doesn't mean that they aren't going to finish university and contribute to society.
I wasn't interested in going to math in high school should the government start making us pay to go to high school then?
I would also add that the more people you have out there with degrees the less value it has, so in order to distinguish yourself from the pack to a potential employer you're going to have to tackle even further education. Taking some of the most productive workers out of the workforce for another 2 years.
If we're going to be practical, let's get more tech schools out there. The trades could really use more spaces.
Our children always considered that the tuition/books they paid were their fair share, considering the potential future benefits. It helped that they chose university paths that led to professional jobs, even if they had other interests (one majored in accounting with a minor in drama). We are fortunate in that all could live at home for most of their degrees; the prohibitive cost of post-secondary schooling is really that of having to live away from home; those within commuting distance of a uni, polytech, or community college have a huge advantage (one of our offspring confided that, for many years, the comment of her friends was "poor you, having to live at home". That changed, however, to "lucky you, your parents are letting your stay". Reality can bite.). Perhaps some form of subsidy for those who HAVE to move away would be more reasonable, rather than a blanked subsidy to all.
Red Tory,
The problem isn't people who aren't interested in a particular class. It is people who go to university who aren't interested in learning the skills that you gain at university.
Also to add to me earlier points. Many people who fit my Nothingbettertodo description do go on to be productive. But generally they go on to be productive in areas that are irrelevant to their degree.
I have a friend from undergrad who found a job that perfectly fit his personality and skills. When I asked if his sociology degree helped him get the job he confessed that he had not mentioned it when applying.
Post a Comment