College should be an option for those who are ready, but not everyone is ready

Julie Mack | By Julie Mack | The Kalamazoo Gazette
on February 25, 2009 at 5:00 AM, updated February 25, 2009 at 3:59 PM

There's a growing movement among American policymakers about the need to channel more students into college on the premise that our collective economic future depends on a well-educated work force and our children's individual economic security is contingent on having some sort of college degree.

Both The Kalamazoo Promise and the Michigan Merit Curriculum are part of that movement.

But there's also another philosophy getting more and more ink -- one that says the problem with American higher education is that the system already has too many kids who don't belong there.

This school of thought, championed by a range of people from high school counselors to college professors to the co-author of "The Bell Curve," has been regularly surfacing on op-ed pages from the Wall Street Journal to the Portland Oregonian.

My 19-year-old, a college freshman, stumbled across the Oregonian piece over the weekend. Its author, Ken Moyle, estimates that "half of our student population shouldn't be there for academic or motivational reasons," but "administrators, academics, publishers, bankers and the sports industry all have a vested interest in increasing the undergraduate population."

So my kid showed me the piece and asked: What did I think?

I think both sides are right.

It's absolutely true that post-secondary education has become far more critical for anyone looking to have a middle-class lifestyle. Michigan is Exhibit A in making the case that the days of the high-wage, low-skill job are over. These days, knowledge isn't just power -- it's money.

Moreover, the longtime underachievement of poor and minority students in America is not only a growing crisis for those children but for our country as a whole. So policymakers are right to beat the drum for college, especially among families and neighborhoods where higher education haven't been a priority -- or even an option.

On the other hand, just as some low-income families may be prone to dismiss the possibility of college for their children, it seems middle-class and affluent families may be too quick to pack their 18-year-olds off to university, ready or not.

Among the parents I know, stories abound of spectacular flameouts during college freshman year. For some children, sending them to college straight out of high school is akin to setting a match to $10,000 or $20,000 or even more.

So where does that leave us?

It's a given we need to do a better job of academically preparing students for life after high school. Even for students who don't go on to college, they'll need those literacy and math skills in the job market. In addition to more academic rigor in the K-12 schools, there need to be systems in place so that all students, regardless of background, see college as a viable option.

That said, it's absurd to assume that every 18-year-old should march off to college. It's clear some teens need time off to grow up. It's also clear that there are many well-paying jobs -- from dental hygienist to electrician to airline pilot -- that do not require four years of college. A bachelor's degree shouldn't be marketed as a ticket for happiness or the sole route of success.

The real problem, from my perspective, is not that there are too many or too few students in college, but that the sorting system is based far more on socioeconomics than talent, ability and desire. College is not for everyone, but it should be open to anyone willing and able to do the work. Students from both ends of the economic spectrum need a broader range of choices.
