Why (and how) the way we purchase higher education must change
One of the largest investments many Americans will ever make is in higher education. With average yearly tuition ranging from $10,230 (public, in-state) to $35,830 (private), and students taking on an average of $29,800 debt in 2018, it seems crazy that we go into something without a particular set outcome other than a degree.
Because sadly, we are no longer in an era where an undergraduate degree is a sure-fire ticket to a (good) job. Indeed, such is the way with anything of value — as more degrees abound, they inherently become less valuable. That’s one of the reasons why students graduating without a clear sense of career direction or prospects is so troubling — because at the end of the day, a college degree without a career roadmap is just a piece of paper.
So when a degree alone won’t secure a job, and when universities aren’t held accountable for ensuring their graduates are gainfully employed upon graduation, it leaves the graduates (and perhaps families that co-signed their loans) to suffer the consequences.
But how can we honestly expect someone to decide what they want to do for the rest of their lives at 17 or 18 years old? When most millennials will change careers 4 times by the age of 32, there absolutely needs to be an era of exploration, trial-and-error, revealing strengths, evaluating job prospects, and understanding the market. A google search is simply not enough. Guidance is required.
When students are making such a large investment, it seems absurd that education consumption is concentrated when we’re least aware of what we actually want to learn and how we’d like to earn a living.
That’s why I was so compelled by Ryan Craig’s book, A New U. Of the many points he makes that I am in total agreement with (my copy is literally translucent with highlights), there was one that truly stood out:
Craig posits that the way we purchase higher education in the future will reflect the changes we’ve made in how we purchase software.
He notes that enterprise software of the past was expensive, had lengthy implementation periods, and involved lots of functionality that most companies never actually used.
Nowadays companies primarily purchase SaaS products, which are immediately available, require no lengthy implementation period, and allow us to only pay for what we need when we need it, adding any additional functionality desired as needed for an extra fee.
His point is extremely well taken:
“At the age of 18 or 19 — rather than trying to anticipate all the higher education you’ll need for the rest of your life, why not opt for what you need right now to get a great first job — then go from there? By opting for faster + cheaper, you’ll be staging your postsecondary education — not getting it all in one greedy gulp.”
He continues, “What I am arguing for is a radical re-staging of how we consume higher education. Young people shouldn’t be forced to eat as much education as they can in one sitting in order to have a shot at a good first job. It’s got to shift to what we need when we need it.”
He’s exactly right. Why make a 4+ year and potentially 6-figure investment before even considering a career path? Why not look for ways to “try before you buy” with faster + cheaper alternatives (i.e. bootcamps), thereby breaking postsecondary education up into pathways to be consumed over the course of one’s life?
Of course, he’s not advocating for completely forgoing the investment in traditional higher education. I believe he’s saying that as our interests evolve and as we mature, we’ll be better equipped to determine what exactly it is we want to study. Why not start with education that can get us on our feet, and make that bigger investment once we have a clearer sense of our desired outcome?
Further, we no longer live in a world where 4 years of post-secondary education will sustain us for the entirety of our careers. Why don’t we begin the tradition of continuous education as needed? Won’t that set us up for pursuing an education that correlates more closely with our actual career paths (with the added benefit of less debt)?
I agree that stocking up on higher education and debt so early in our lives is illogical, especially given the fact that we’ll likely need a few modifications as we grow and mature throughout our careers (not to mention how much of a contrast that is to how we make other investments in our lives).
However, I’d add an additional twist to Craig’s SaaS model of education:
Before you “buy” any education, whether traditional higher education or the faster + cheaper alternatives he describes in his book, you’ll have a third party help you determine which might best fit your needs.
To clarify, I’m not advocating that we have a representative from each (like in our current system of high school guidance counselors and admissions counselors from each university), but an impartial entity that will help you explore your strengths, understand possible paths, and help you align those to the education options available. All before you make any significant investment or decision about which educational paths to pursue.
Not only should students spare themselves the debt of an unfocused degree, but there should be ample opportunity to support career exploration. That needs to happen before a major educational investment.
Because even with Craig’s faster + cheaper alternatives, students still need to decide which to pursue. And given the narrow focus of the majority of those types of programs (programming, UX/UI, data science, etc.), it’s important for students to understand their own interests and strengths, along with potential career outcomes, before diving in — even if they are significantly shorter and less expensive than a 4 year degree.
That’s why I’m really excited about the work of a fellow educational disruptor — Rutledge Long.
He’s building a program to specifically help students figure things out before making the major investment of traditional higher education (or even deciding if college is the path they ultimately want).
I believe programs like Rutledge’s Parachute Bridge — a pre-college program with hands-on life skills, career exploration, international education, and wilderness training— are essential to orienting students prior to making such a significant investment of money and time. At the same time, these programs help students develop reflection and self-evaluation skills that they’ll undoubtedly need throughout their lives as their careers continuously evolve.
Indeed, the way we purchase higher education is at odds with how the future of work is evolving. With multiple career shifts and even faster changes in technology, a 4-year education binge at the outset of our professional lives seems questionable.
How might we reorient our educational structures to provide the foundations and exploration needed at the outset of our careers in a way that also enables us to (1) not take on such significant debt and (2) re-up on education as needed (akin to adding extra features to our SaaS purchases)?
How might we shift our culture of educational consumption?
How might universities evolve to account for these changes?
Clearly I have more questions than answers, and I certainly welcome any and all feedback.
Perhaps what I’m most curious about is whether how we purchase higher education will in fact evolve the way software purchasing has. While the bootcamps seem to be a reflection of this change, it’ll certainly be interesting to see how universities themselves respond to these trends.
