Should unemployed grads sue their universities?
I've been thinking lately about the problem of the glut of unemployed college graduates.
The Marxist non-solution is yet another bail-out: to forgive student loan debt.
However, this does not address the real problem.
Universities are viewed, rightly or wrongly, as the gateway to better jobs.
Students and their families go into ridiculous debt based on this implied promise.
Yet, when at university, students do not receive the training needed to succeed in the business world.
Instead, they are indoctrinated in the ways of anti-business agitation.
Soon, if it hasn't happened already, employers will begin to realize that hiring anyone with a non-tech degree or *any* Ivy League degree is risking hiring an anti-business agitator.
Google has already stated that they prefer hiring people who have not attended college because they are more intellectually curious.
At what point should unemployed grads sue their universities for fraud?
Your thoughts are welcome.
The Marxist non-solution is yet another bail-out: to forgive student loan debt.
However, this does not address the real problem.
Universities are viewed, rightly or wrongly, as the gateway to better jobs.
Students and their families go into ridiculous debt based on this implied promise.
Yet, when at university, students do not receive the training needed to succeed in the business world.
Instead, they are indoctrinated in the ways of anti-business agitation.
Soon, if it hasn't happened already, employers will begin to realize that hiring anyone with a non-tech degree or *any* Ivy League degree is risking hiring an anti-business agitator.
Google has already stated that they prefer hiring people who have not attended college because they are more intellectually curious.
At what point should unemployed grads sue their universities for fraud?
Your thoughts are welcome.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
A lot of innovative professors have now flipped the teaching paradigm. Have the students look through the text and the easy content before class, have the professor lecture on the easy, intermediate, and difficult content, and then assign homework questions that address all levels. It is easier now to get into greater depth than it used to be.
not shocked at all. A bunch of buildings and administrative overhead. Just like with public education. It goes to prove the education establishment has lost its way overall and doesn't know what its real purpose to provide is. It's not in any sense part of the free market. that goes to private universities as well.
I'm sure your university does many things differently, t's one of the reasons why it's been growing fast. But when you read about people going on staff at universities and being paid alot of money for one class a semester or maybe a year (Paul Krugman anyone?) it's reasonable to question intent and competitiveness for students and taxpayers who have a stake in the institutions.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/04...
"Tuition + room and board costs the university $40-50 K per year. That really is a breakeven number."
Why? If I look at professor salaries I ask, for the first two years, most students are taking classes that are 101s-at a large state school that means they are 1 of 200 or more students sitting in that class. If they go to a "lab" associated with that class, they are taught by a grad student, who is being used as free labor. Of course I am referring to the basic liberal arts side, not to quality engineering programs. Even if the classes are excellent, the professor cost to student ratio for at least the first two years should be minimal considering most take a 16 credit hour schedule. Feeding and housing costs shouldn't be the university's business in the first place. and if they don't make money at it, why do many of them require you have to live on campus for the first year or two? Many large dorms are certainly not in the students' best interest to live in.
2) Forgiving student loan debt is obviously not Galt-like. These students did trade value for value, however, as did I. The value they got was a set of tools to succeed in industry. The success is up to them.
3) I sent out periodic e-mail blasts to students, alumni, and paying members of my local professional societies advertising jobs, co-ops, and internships. Some of you get that e-mail blast.
4) As for the student loan debt, students actually pay FAR less than the real education costs if they go to a state university. Tuition + room and board costs the university $40-50 K per year. That really is a breakeven number.
Students paying less are doing so at property owners' expense.
5) The student loan situation was made far worse by the President. One of his first acts was to abolish student loans from anybody but Sallie Mae, the government provider. This was an act to get his tentacles into private universities.
As for government loans, I'm fine with them as long as the interest rates are equal to the going market rate for long term loans AND there is no legal way (except death) for the student to get out of repayment.
What I see is "let the buyer beware" and not fraud. But I will admit, again, that perhaps how things are done is different in my state.
I don't welcome these suits in cases where the school really didn't promise employability. But some have done so, and should be responsible when they don't deliver.
And if I were shopping for a school now, I would demand such a guarantee and not go to schools that don't offer one.
dino like me like?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWGns2UL9...
Load more comments...