The motivation to learn, create, expand, experiment, eliminate parameters, succeed, invent and ignore the words, "it can't be done" or "it can't get any better" come from within a human being. Everyone has the potential, once they realize that no institution has so much power to guarantee success or failure. All of the answers needed to succeed are available without a college education, no matter what area of study. One only need to find it. As for suing an institution for fraud, never. We all have the freedom to choose our education. However, few will ever think outside the structured agenda implanted in their being since early childhood. (I am not sure if including a personal example here is allowed, so delete me if not.) My son went to a "good" college. While it did provide him with a somewhat beneficial look at life, most of his education has come from his own desire to learn. After college he started with nothing but his mind and his inexhaustible thirst for knowledge, accomplishment and pride in himself and his work. His success is his own and less than 10% would I attribute to his formal education. His convictions, innovation, hard work and dedication make up the other 90%. He built his business from nothing, including the "proper education" and no money or loans. I am one very proud mother of a son who believes in himself. http://www.harrelsontrumpets.com/Default...

A related thread: thank you all.
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/17...

I find myself unappetizingly 'in the middle' on this issue. I think that the 'required general classes' are (a) a way of subsidizing classes that no one would otherwise take, (b) a way of padding the curriculum so that it takes 5-6 years to get a '4 year degree'. So the first thing I would do is to get rid of the general requirements. Perhaps the major-dependent requirements should stay, though.

I do think that even STEM degrees are teaching ineffectual work habits. (I speak from having hired these people from top notch tech colleges.) Even colleges which have explicit pro-Entrepreneur classes are generally oriented around group/team work rather than individual accomplishment and there is a pervasive sense that 'work hard whether you feel like it or not' is an evil philosophy.

It IS the student's responsibility to choose classes according to their own decision. Being young means being malleable, though, and our colleges are still oriented around training English Lords who have a financial independence but need to be able to converse at diplomatic dinners. I do think that the colleges guide students in that direction: "what you need to be a well-rounded person".

Jan

A major problem has been the failure of high school guidance counselors and colleges to provide meaningful guidance as to employability in many fields. Hence graduates with a Bachelors in Psychology, in a field requiring an advanced degree, or many others in the liberal arts with limited prospect of employability. Few students or their parents are independently wealthy, and can afford spending thousands of dollars for an education offering meaningful employment. prospective college students need meaningful counseling, clearing showing them the economic consequences of their choice of major.

Have trouble endorsing lawsuits as a remedy for something that can be evaluated and decided on objectively and without external pressure.

If there is a problem it isn't the universities, it is the accreditation boards and the funding streams for universities. Few universities focus on undergraduate programs, where a vast majority of the value to industry lies.
Why? Because universities get graduate funding from industry, and considerable research paid by Government.

I'd rather forgive student loans than hand-out money for nothing, but don't see how this makes sense. Some kids and their parents reviewed the options and made an investment in education. I'd really like to know how many unpaid loans are for liberal arts vs engineering. When wasn't it obvious where the jobs were?