College Hype

Harvard caught my attention by the time I was 12 years old.  I don’t remember what I heard people say about it, but I knew one thing: when I put a Harvard sweatshirt on, the name affected people.  There was a Harvard aura—a mystique…something powerful that I wanted to tap into…looking back I would call it the seductive college “hype.”

A look at the hype:

The drive to get into a good college began for me in elementary school.  The race to get ahead and win in the school system is very strong.  Striving to reach the “mecca” of our culture—the coveted acceptances at idolized institutions has parents and kids running gauntlets of activities, testing and competition.

The craze around college doesn’t just affect students near college age…it reaches much further back.  In junior high school the goal was to pass freshman level math, science and language. .  When I was in elementary school there were already aptitude tests administered to single out students for the “Gifted And Talented Education (GATE)” program.  GATE kids had more advanced opportunities, field trips and enrichment activities…a bit of a jump on the crowd.

These days some parents run to the most lauded preschools right after the pregnancy test shows a little blue plus sign.  This way the child can be working on getting ahead on the college game will they gestate in the womb (don’t want the kid wasting any time)! One cannot begin early enough planning a regimen of sports, clubs, leadership, music and other strategic enrichment, the critical ingredients of the “perfect college resume.”   It’s all about being ahead of the curve…no matter what it takes.  No questions asked.

In September 2006 the Contra Costa Times ran an article entitled “The Price of Perfection: Teenage Overachievers Failing at Happiness.”  The demographic discussed is the epitome of the “collegebound.”  According to author Jackie Burrell, “22 percent of those Juicy-Couture-clad adolescent girls are clinically depressed—three times the national level—and the boys don’t fare any better.”  What is the plague running rampant among the upper crust up-and-comers in this country?  These “fantasy children” may “look perfect on the surface” but “feel like they’re going through the motions.” 

Many students shut down internally and turn to damaging coping mechanisms in the face of “high pressure, ultra-competitive schools where teens overload on Advanced Placement courses and extra curriculars, even at the expense of downtime and sleep.  The pressure is unrelenting.”

The Contra Costa Times quotes psychologist Steve Freemire: “Growing up, I’m so glad I couldn’t aspire to more than a 4.0…It’s never enough. ‘I got a 4.3.’  Well, that kid got a 4.7.  Then fear—is that ked going to get into UC Berkeley?  You never feel like you can rest.” 

I can vouch for the damaging effect of the pressure of trying to “win” in the college admissions game.  I went to a high school that fits the high pressure and privilege description perfectly.  By my senior year of high school, with years of striving, stressing and non-stop studying under my belt, the college application and selection process I turned to unhealthy coping mechanisms, and struggled with an eating disorder.  The prospect of rejection, disappointment and humiliation gnawed at me.  Having been voted “most likely to succeed” by my senior class I couldn’t shake the thought that I was really “most likely to let everybody down.”  And it made me sick…while everything remained largely “under control” on the surface.

The article cites Dr. Madeline Levine, author of The Price of Privilege: How Parental Pressure and Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of Disconnected and Deeply Unhappy Kids.  Levine points out that “there’s a tacit agreement in affluent communities…no one exposes vulnerabilities…everybody’s getting straight A’s, everybody’s going to an Ivy League school.”  When bragging rights carry such importance, emphasis falls away from grounded, healthy priorities like balance between   all-nighters and neurotic self-perfection become the orders of the day. 

The Contra Costa Times interviewed some high school students from wealthy San Francisco suburbs, asking their views on the subject of high school and college prestige pressure:

“’…[Students are] often under so much pressure so often that they crack and have a mental breakdown or worse: turn to drugs and alcohol for rebellion against the strict bubble in which we live.  The pressure that is allied within my school is by no means healthy.’ –Elan Lublinener, Campolindo High, Moraga, CA

‘Many people that I know stay up into the hours of the morning, working on projects, studying for tests, or just finishing homework after going to sports practices, council meetings, clubs or being with their friends.  The cafeteria’s decision to sell energy drinks such as ‘GoGirl’ and ‘Monster’ was a very wise decision, as there are many people in my classes about to fall asleep, who are sipping these drinks like there’s no tomorrow.  Being well-rounded in the fields of co-curriculars, student leadership, academics and athletics all seems to have one focus in the community: colleges.’ –Alexandra Rudolf, Carondelet High School, Concord, CA”

Madeline Levine describes the hype this way: “There’s this pressure we’ve bought into, in terms of the culture…it’s hard to swim against the tide.   It’s a vicious, perfect cycle.”

(Contra Costa Times Wednesday September 27, 2007)

The Cost of Buying into the hype $$$

Trying to “win the game” of getting into the best college has become the ultimate end in itself in too many cases.  The prescribed course of action is to pour out substantial resource and energy, only to be at the mercy of an uneven game of admissions Russian roulette. 

All through application season students bow and groveling, poring over essays and transcripts, begging to pay big uncle Bursar.  The yearly tuition at many leading schools is nearing $50,000!  Universities win big in this scenario.  Throngs of talented students pound down their doors, trampling over one another begging to pay tuition.  Once they arrive they are so relieved to be there that they tend to accept whatever is handed to them with uber-grateful credulousness.  Seems like higher education has it all figured out.  Businesses in other fields would give anything for such obliging customers.

In August 2006 Fox ran a special program, hosted by Newt Gingrich, looking at the costs of higher education.  Fox’s findings: the federally government spends billions of dollars, parents everywhere take out second mortgages, and the average student debt at the end of four college years is $20,000 (and growing like a weed on fertilizer).  According to Forbes, “new student loans through banks tripled to $17 billion from 2001-02 to 2005-06.  In yesteryear many families skipped vacations to meet college costs; nowadays they substitute their houses via home equity loans.”

Fox interviewed Sarah Hineson, a University of Scranton graduate.  She is dealing with $80,000 of debt.  Now she is a special education teacher making $30,000 per year, terrified that she is hopelessly buried financially.

Another case that Fox looked into was a family looking at out of state tuition for their daughter (versus their local community college).  The daughter was furious at the prospect of having to attend community college, and on their campus tour the father fell in love with out of state U-Mass Amherst.  Despite their enthusiasm they had to face facts: the family’s yearly income ($135,000) would not be enough to cover U-Mass for the elder sister, and higher education for the younger.  The parents attempted to fill out FAFSA “the most difficult form to fill out,” and found to their dismay that they “made too much to get any aid.”  The only remaining options became private loans and extra debt for the daughter.

I ran across the following blog entry on the website “College Confidential,” and can’t resist the urge to offer a few comments and responses:

“I am well regarded as an overachiever with a strong work ethic and a passion to live life to the fullest. After four diligent years of study throughout high school and countless hours devoted to college applications, I have gained acceptance to UMASS Amherst Commonwealth College ($14,000 per year), UVM Honors College ($38,000 per year), Brandeis University ($35,000 per year), and Tufts University ($38,000 per year). I’m very thankful to have accomplished what I have thus far. I feel honored and I truly do believe that a college experience at any one of these schools will ultimately boil down to what I make of it.

Going into my undergraduate education, I really have not a clue what I kind of career I want to devote the majority of my life to. I do know that I have a true passion to explore the fields of Philosophy, Religion, Body/Mind?and a knack for Personal Finance (started and managed a large-scale neighborhood landscaping business for five years). Now, I do not know where these interests will lead me. These same interests led my dad to 8 years of study at college and provided him with an outstanding foundation to become a chiropractor. Chiropractic certainly interests me as a career, but I do not know if that is to be my fate. I am ever anxious to find out, to broaden my horizons, to stretch my mind in ways I never thought possible, to learn as much as I possibly can until I can pinpoint an area of study that clicks for me. If I end up delving into Philosophy for four years and deciding that I was meant to be a philosopher, that is perfectly fine by me. I would like to live a comfortable lifestyle, but I am not driven by wealth. In fact, at this stage of my life, I would decline a life of luxury, fame, and ease if it were offered to me.

If I could choose a college, I would be headed to Tufts for 4 years hands down. Every aspect of the school is an absolutely perfect match for me: location, size, atmosphere, academics, social life?

(I pretty much gained acceptance to Tufts by writing three philosophical essays, 1 of which detailed my passion to work alongside modern day renowned Philosopher Daniel Dennet, who is well known for collaborating with students and teaching classes for incoming freshmen.)”

As I read this entry I can relate to it so closely it almost hurts.  At the end of four years of “over-achieving” in high school I analyzed every guidebook and website to fine “the perfect school.”  Given its mid-size, location, east coast “classic college” aura, and small class sizes, I decided to swallow the high tuition and go to Tufts as opposed to one of the more affordable schools that accepted me.  Coincidentally I also decided to study philosophy.  Like the eager blogger I entered Tufts with the highest hopes of studying deep and profound topics with renowned thinkers and growing in ways that I couldn’t even imagine.  I can tell her that if she walks into Tufts looking to Daniel Dennett and the philosophy department he leads to help her define a positive direction for her life she is in dubious hands.  She will find herself the pupil of a cynical teacher bent on bashing God, and a department with no cohesion, structure or urge to help students build lives or careers. 

After two years at Tufts University, with its lethargic student body, random course catalog, and slew of professors away on sabbatical, I did find myself growing…right out of Tufts University.  I transferred…disappointed, in debt, and in search of a more dynamic, grounded school. Two years out of school I have substantial college debt (as do my parents).  At the risk of offending Tufts Jumbos everywhere, I must admit that I hope for this girl’s sake that she chooses a school other than Tufts.  I would submit to her that she would get more for her money and efforts elsewhere.

While it is no surprise to anybody that college is expensive, Fox did made a disturbing discovery as it probed further into where tuition money goes!  According to Fox’s research only one in three dollars paid to institutions of higher learning actually goes to instruction.  Even money spent on professor salaries (which are up 50% in the last 20 years after adjusting for inflation) often end up funding professor time spent writing obscure articles rather than teaching. 

Professor salaries are just the tip of the iceberg.  Fox discovered a penchant in higher education institutions for far more decadent “investments.”  For instance, Penn state has recently poured funds into such amenities as a movie theater, ball rooms, a 140 million dollar gym, climbing wall and spa…apparently more interested in building the school’s resemblance to the “Taj Mahal” than keeping costs more reasonable—and more education-related.

Forbes Magazine ran a recent article challenging the pervasive push-over tendencies of high school students flowing into the college system on auto-pilot.  The article, “Five Reasons to Skip College,” begins with a simple statement: “College is expensive. Four years at an elite university like Princeton or Harvard will set you back around $160,000.”  The aricle acknowledges the benefits that student expect to get out of such a chunk of change: statistics like “on average, the holder of a four-year college degee will earn 62% more over their lifetimes than a typical high-school graduate.”  How can you argue against shelling out the big bucks for such promising returns?

Forbes argues that the 62% greater income number doesn’t tell the whole story: “although there is clearly a correlation between earnings and a four-year degree, a correlation isn’t the same thing as a cause. Economists like Robert Reischauer ruffled feathers several years ago by pointing out that talented, driven kids are more likely to go to college in the first place–that they succeed, in other words, because of their innate abilities, not because of their formal education.”

 Skin the Cat without the Rat Race

College admissions has become a prime venue for posturing—schools to students (real objective being money) and students to schools (only the student knows his or her prime objective). Preparing for college has become such a demanding process that many people get into panic mode…rushing to SAT prep courses and application essay workshops. Is this pressure-cooker, ego-laden rat race the wisest way to approach college? It often browbeats students out of to maintaining standards of their own and brings them to the gates of academia beleaguered and full of sycophantic gratitude, ready to swallow everything the “high and mighty” places have to offer.

In all of this it is easy to get tunnel vision and forget that scrambling for an acceptance letter as high on U.S. News and World Report’s top colleges rankings isn’t the only approach to post-high school accomplishment. 

How much stake should students put into the rankings anyway?  In March 2007 Time Magazine ran an article entitled, “The College Rankings Revolt.”  Some college administrators are raising questions as to the validity and usefulness of the institutional “beauty pageant.”  The race to be on the top ten most prestigious lists may be draining value from students.  Time’s Julie Rawe reports a phenomenon called “ranksteering; specifically tailoring administrative decisions to move higher up on the list.  The rankings encourage more per-pupil spending, which makes up 10% of a school’s score and certainly doesn’t help keep tuition down.”  Another problem with the most ubiquitous college-rankings is that they overemphasize “selective admissions data like low acceptance rates and high SAT scores for freshmen while giving short shrift to what really matters but is harder to measure: the education students receive once they get on campus” (Time, 3/23/07).

 A note to pre-college and current college students: take a step back and a deep breath.  Be realistic about the rules of the game you are playing and decide what you are willing to put up with—and what you are not.

In an August 2006 Article, “How VIPs Get In,” Time magazine sheds some light on just one of the loopholes built into admissions “logic.”  Time points out that “Colleges do a lot of marketing to ensure that they bring in a huge number of applications, only to turn down most of them to make room for rich kids.”  While the institutions may come up with new loan and aid programs to make sure they grab quota’s worth of low-income students they do not go so far as to diminish “preferences they have for wealthy kids or legacies.”  The demographic that gets the cold shoulder in this scenario is often the middle-class students.  “All they bring is brilliance, hard work and achievement.  Apparently that’s not enough” (45).   

Before bowing at the feet of college, and offering time, money, blood, sweat and tears in order to boast a degree from a big name school, a careful, honest and sober moment of reflection is essential. Turn down the hype and think about what is actually best for knowledge, success, character and happiness instead of frenetically competing. 

There are many ways to seize the college tiger by the tail successfully.  The most obvious and well-trod paths may not mark the wisest or most rewarding strategies.  More creativity and lateral thinking on the part of students will reveal a host of options.  This should be an encouragement.  So what are some perspectives about college value from sources other than U.S. News and World Report, Princeton Review, and what will impress the neighbors?

In August 2006 Time Magazine ran a full feature about college admission and selection.  The cover reads in bold type: “Who Needs Harvard: Forget the Ivy League—The New Rules of the Game Say the Best Fit is what Matters.”  The article, penned by Nancy Gibbs and Nathan Thornburgh, acknowledges the competition on steroids dynamic that permeates college admissions and posits that students do well to stop looking at college as “a prize to be won.”  The feature highlights students who chose not to make college prestige top priority. 

James Sanchez, for one, “turned down Harvard in favor of small Davidson College in North Carolina, lured by the promise of working with actual professors instead of the graduate students who often teach at many name universities.   Now a senior applying to medical school, he has a wealth of laboratory experience and no regrets.”  Good for James, right?  But didn’t he sacrifice something huge when he gave up the Harvard name and corresponding “little black book” of connections?  Maybe it wasn’t such a big sacrifice after all.  Time asks: don’t “students need to be able to tap into the old-boy network in order to get a job?”  The article responds to its own question: “Chances are, the kid is going to be doing a job that doesn’t even exist now, so connections won’t do much good.  The rules have changed” (38).

Students today do well to consider the cash, personal and opportunity costs involved with getting into an attending a school…open to the possibility that an Ivy may not be the best choice.  Mostafa Ibrahim opted to minimize financial debt in his college choice: “Ibrahim got accepted by Yale, Columbia and a gaggle of other top schools.  Yale offered serious aid, but none could match the University of Cincinnati’s bid to cover his tuition and pay his books, board and room too” (38).  He chose the University of Cincinnati and I bet he won’t lose any sleep over the chunk of debt that he passed up.

The Time feature offers a list of strategies that college shoppers can consider in order to break out of the entrenched student mindset: “What do I mean, what do I want?  What do I get?  I’ve been working for four years without daylight.  I’m supposed to go to the most selective school I’ve earned right? (42).  Here are some of the other approaches that Time recommends:

• Take advantage of honors programs at affordable schools
• Travel and look at schools outside the U.S.
• Get straight into a niche that works for you.  If you already know you want to do, go ahead and specialize early.
• Don’t pass up small schools where you may have the opportunity for more professor interaction
• Look at Christian colleges!  “There are scores of colleges that mix liberal arts and religious values to attract competitive students.”

The Intercollegiate Studies Institute published a guide to choosing the right college as well.  The ISI’s “purpose is to convey to successive generations of college youth a better understanding of the values and institutions that sustain a free and virtuous society.”  This is a unique mission that stands out against the backdrop of what much of academia stands for and can help “round out” students understanding of colleges before they commit to attend.  ISI calls their book ISI’s Guide to Choosing the Right College: The Whole Truth about America’s Top Schools.  This guidebook includes the findings of independent researchers regarding subjects like presence or absence of a core curriculum, the prevalence of politics in the classroom, the state of free speech on campus.  Be prepared for some of the Ivies to fall short in many of these important arenas.

(www.isi.org)

In an article also entitled, “Who Needs Harvard,” written in 2004 for Atlantic monthly,

Gregg Easterbrook questions the assumption that “elite college attendance” is the linchpin of success later in life.  He cites the results of research conducted by Alan Krueger, an economist from Princeton and Stacy Berg Dale, who investigated the effects of an elite college education on income of students as they move into the workforce.  What they found as that “for students bright enough to win admission into a top school, later income varied little, no matter which type of college they attended.  In other words, the student, not the school, was responsible for the success” (2).  It appears that prestigious schools are not the same gatekeepers to success that they may have been at one time when you look at the elite who’s who lists of post-academia heavy-hitters.  Some examples: “61 percent of new students at Harvard Law School” in 2003 “had received their bachelor’s degrees outside the Ivy League” (3).   For students who go directly to work instead of applying to graduate programs may find a degree from a “top tier” school even less of a boost.  The fact is that “the majority of employers aren’t looking for status degrees, and some may even avoid candidates from top schools, on the theory that such aspirants have unrealistic expectations of quick promotion” (3). 

Are students and families really getting what they really expect out of the 4-6 year s and 10-160 thousand dollars they pour into colleges?  What is the real value after you factor out the short-lived window of being able to tell people about impressive post-high school plans and having a prestigious school next to your name in the annual “which students got in where” article in the local newspaper? 

There is a rampant illusion that a few top colleges have a monopoly on quality higher education.  This simply is not the case.  This “monopoly mirage” has at least one tangible, problematic effect.  It causes the price of college to explode! Forbes reports:  “One reason for exploding prices: The schools can get away with it.  Demand exceeds supply at high-end private schools….also the prestige of American institutions attracts hoards of foreign students.  The irrefutable proof of excess demand is that universities pay legions of employees to turn down perfectly good business.  Many first-tier universities admit only one of ten applicants.”

While Atlantic Monthly and Time both join Forbes in calling the idea that there are just a few schools that offer the ultimate education into question, and encourage students to expand their horizons, they do not call the whole 4 year college “drill” into question.  Forbes magazine takes the healthy skepticism further.  Forbes reports facts that should caution college customers.  One troubling discovery: in “a 2005 federally sponsored study” results showed “declining literacy among the college educated.”  In addition it found that “many schools have abandoned core curriculums, along with any effort to influence their students’ morals and ideals.”  Buyer beware.

Former Harvard president, Derek Bok, expresses similar concerns in his book, Our Underachieving Colleges.  Having gained extensive inside the brick wall perspective, he reflects that schools are widely failing to provide what students attend college for.  It is alarming that “many seniors graduate without being able to write well enough to satisfy their employers.  Many cannot reason clearly or perform competently in analyzing complex, non-technical problems, even though faculties rank critical thinking as the primary goal of a college education.”  The laundry list of shortcomings continues: “Few undergraduates receiving a degree are able to speak or write a foreign language.  Most have never taken a course in quantitative reasoning or acquired the knowledge needed to be a reasonably informed in a democracy” (8).  Bok laments that this list is a mere sampling of a far longer litany.

If a higher education no longer delivers true balanced discussion (instead of dogmatic secularism), character education (important to most employers), work skills, work ethic, track to lucrative employment, then what good is place or the degree…it appears as if the emperor is not wearing any clothes.

Students who manage to stop white-knuckling the “glitz factor” of college may find themselves free to see an often overlooked truth:  there are infinite ways to acquire knowledge, capability, experience and competence.  Consider the following:

Start at a community college. 

Many community colleges offer affordability, convenience and quality courses.  Community college is an economical launch point for many students.  Using a community college program to fulfill core requirements can save students a substantial amount of money and increase the number of schools that may admit them as transfers after one or two years of study.  There is no sacred rule stating that 4 years of college is the only way to have “the college experience.”  And if students are not prepared to go away to school right after high school, if they need more time to determine a direction, or if they are not admitted to a school with a program or financial package that meets their needs, they would likely be wiser to take the community college route.  By the time graduate schools and companies look at college graduates, where and how students spend their first two years are rarely primary concerns.

Harness the power of the web!

The internet is a powerful tool that anyone can harness for education conveniently and affordably.  The internet has the potential to revolutionize many aspects of higher education, from textbooks to degrees. Just one example: in this digital era it may no longer be necessary to spend thousands of dollars on heavy, cumbersome, expensive textbooks, for instance.  Cyber resources may help to keep traditional text costs more in check, a much-needed check given that “the cost of the average college textbook increased 186 percent between 1986 and 2004, according to a study by the Government Accountability Office.”  With e-texts available for much material, and sites like Amazon carrying books, crowded college bookstores with high mark-ups may finally be following the dodo…like to the advantage of students.

The internet is changing much more than just the textbook world in higher education.  In October 2006 U.S. News and world report ran a cover story called “Online Education.”  The story says that there are currently 3 million students pursuing degrees online.  “Distance education” is now allowing these millions of people to earn degrees in an environment of the highest autonomy, flexibility and economy.  An article by Paul Rosevear that ran on AOL on May 2, 2007 reflected that, “advances in online education have made it possible for anyone with a computer, internet access, and a healthy helping of self-discipline to learn virtually anytime, anywhere.  According to the United States Department of Education, at least 22 states offer some form of public virtual school instruction.”

While online learning is not necessarily most peoples’ first thought when pondering where and how to pursue higher education, great leadership in the online learning world is producing impressive results.  Rosevear’s article notes that “much of the excitement and curiosity surrounding online learning is facilitated by administrators.”  In the southern United States leadership from the Southern Regional Educational Board (SREB) raves about online learning programs.  Two thirds of the administrators on the SREB “rate online student experiences equal to, if not greater than, those garnered in the classroom” (2).   The southern US has blazed trails in popularizing e-learning, partly because the venue provides educational access to individuals in rural areas where physical campuses are few and far between.  Professional athletes have been another demographic to catch on early to the online degree programs.

October 2006 U.S. News and World Report ran the article, “Minoring in E-Learning: Some Mets Prospects Take a Swing at a Degree.”  In the article Diane Cole quotes Dan Murray, a Mets prospect who left San Diego State University early to pursue baseball: “I don’t want any future opportunities closed off to me,” in or our of baseball, for lack of a college degree” (65).  Murray now is working on a degree through Drexel University—an endeavor that he can structure to fit into his regimented spring training and baseball season schedule.  Drexel University also suits the budget needs of many Mets minor-leaguers who earn minimal salaries as they pursue the big show.  More than 20 of Murray’s teammates are joining him in his Drexel education.  For these athletes online learning is a perfect fit…a fit that other teams will take advantage of.   Drexel University president, Constantine Papadakis hopes that “the Mets program will serve as a model for other teams and universities to help players further their education,” following the Mets’ pioneering.

For the millions of students following e-learning structured by a team there are some key considerations that can help in selecting a high-quality program to meet particular needs and interests.  Kenneth Terrell’s article, “How Do I Choose a Program,” emphasizes that the most important first step is to investigate a schools accreditation.  In the accreditation process “online colleges and graduate programs are expected to meet the same standards as traditional institutions and thus should be reviewed by one of the same six regional associations recognized by the U.S. Department of Education and the Council for Higher Education Accreditation” (U.S. News and World Report).  With accreditation verified it can be helpful to look into how long a particular institution has been offering e-courses since more established programs are likely to have more resources available and smoother operations set up. 

Once enrolled students can take either asynchronous classes where are comprised of assignments and tests posted and scheduled by the professor to be completed by students anytime day or night before a set due date.  During the other sort of online courses—dubbed synchronous—“students and the professor log in to websites at regular times for online chats” about the subject. With technology advanced as it is, “instant messaging, online video lectures, wiki websites…online education can be every bit as engaging,” as classroom lectures (U.S. News). 

Truth be told, a large cadre of students, without fail, is preoccupied with personal business (or entertainment) on laptops in any given traditional classroom—perhaps this generation finds the online interaction more engaging than the teacher talking for 2 hours in a large lecture hall.  Some students report just this, commenting that “taking a course online is actually more challenging than a traditional method,” requiring greater self-discipline, and nowhere to hide in a corner when you haven’t done the reading since, “comments in the chats and posts on the website show how actively you are engaged in assignments” (U.S. News). 

The self-motivation and discipline of “e-students” is not going unnoticed either—especially since these two qualities top the list of desired traits sought by employers.  A Yahoo Hotjobs article from October 24, 2006 entitled, “Is Distance Education Right for You?” discussed the job prospects for online degree holders: “a growing number of online students report that their employers embrace the initiative and independent learning style indicative of a student with online academic experience.”  With technology as a driving and innovating force in the marketplace today students who “can demonstrate mastery and experience are those who will have the leading edge” (hotjobs.yahoo.com).

Last, but not least, online education joins community college as one of the more affordable avenues to a degree.  Even given the low base tuition online students often have the opportunity to qualify for financial aid as well—easing the college “buy-in” bill.  Students creative and strategic enough to exercise alternatives to pricey four-year education can get the best of all worlds—the ultimate coup: choose an affordable educational route and invest what would have been spent on higher tuition elsewhere—graduate with a degree and a full bank account.  Then you can take your friends (like me) with mountains of debt out to a nice dinner now and then.

When students realize that four-year colleges don’t own the educational market, and the “monopoly mirage” shatters there will be a possibility of putting consumer power back in the ivory tower and demanding more accountability out of higher education institutions.  Conversations about how to hold institutions of higher learning to higher quality standards could increase, and begin producing better results for students and families. Tuition-payers could have greater leverage to demand less research and more teaching from professors, emphasis on getting students in and out in 4 years, testing and research to show what students are actually getting out of college, more open disclosure from schools as to how funds are allocated.  It’s about time for academia to take a little heat from the people footing the bills.  Derek Bok puts it this way: “Given the vastly expanded resources colleges have acquired, thanks to growing private donations, steadily rising tuitions, and massive infusions of federal financial aid, isn’t it fair to expect the quality of education to improve as well? (29)”