Higher education in the United States includes a variety of institutions of higher education. Strong research and funding have helped make United States colleges and universities among the world's most prestigious, making them particularly attractive to international students, professors and researchers in the pursuit of academic excellence. According to the Shanghai Jiao Tong University's Academic Ranking of World Universities, more than 30 of the highest-ranked 45 institutions are in the United States (as measured by awards and research output).[1] Public universities, private universities, liberal arts colleges, and community colleges all have a significant role in higher education in the United States.
According to UNESCO[2] the US has the second largest number of higher education institutions in the world, with a total of 5,758, an average of more than 115 per state. The US also has the 2nd[3] highest number of higher education students in the world, a figure of 14,261,778,[4] or roughly 4.75% of the total population. The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), an office of the US Department of Education, stated in 2010 that there are 4,495 Title IV-eligible, degree-granting institutions (including colleges, universities, and junior colleges) in the country.[5]
The 2006 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau found that 19.5 percent of the population had attended college but had no degree, 7.4 percent held an associate's degree, 17.1 percent held a bachelor's degree, and 9.9 percent held a graduate or professional degree. Only a small gender gap was present: 27 percent of the overall population held a bachelor's degree or higher, with a slightly larger percentage of men (27.9 percent) than women (26.2 percent).[6] However, despite increasing economic incentives for people to obtain college degrees, the percentage of people graduating from high school and college has been declining as of 2008.[7] 70.1% of 2009 high school graduates enrolled in college. Historically, 76% of those who graduate in the lower 40% of their high school class will not obtain a college degree.[8]
The survey found that the area with the highest percentage of people 25 years and over with a bachelor's degree was the District of Columbia (45.9 percent), followed by the states of Massachusetts (37 percent), Maryland (35.1 percent), Colorado (34.3 percent), and Connecticut (33.7 percent). The state with the lowest percentage of people 25 years and over with a bachelor's degree was West Virginia (16.5 percent), next lowest were Arkansas (18.2), Mississippi (18.8 percent), Kentucky (20 percent), and Louisiana (20.3 percent).[9]
Contents |
The American university system is largely decentralized. Public universities are administered solely by the individual states. Public universities often have much lower tuition than private universities because subsidies are provided by state governments. This subsidy averaged $19,220 per student in 2002, when average tuition costs at a public college was $18,273.[10]
American universities developed independent accreditation organizations to vouch for the quality of the degrees they offer. The accreditation agencies rate universities and colleges on criteria such as academic quality—the quality of their libraries, the publishing records of their faculty, and the degrees which their faculty hold. Nonaccredited institutions are perceived as lacking in quality and rigor, and may be termed diploma mills.
Colleges and universities in the U.S. vary in terms of goals: some may emphasize a vocational, business, engineering, or technical curriculum while others may emphasize a liberal arts curriculum. Many combine some or all of the above.
Two-year colleges (often but not always community colleges) usually offer the associate's degree such as an Associate of Arts (A.A.). Community colleges are often open admissions, with generally lower tuition than other state or private schools. Four-year colleges (which usually have a larger number of students and offer a greater range of studies than two-year colleges) offer the bachelor's degree, such as the Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) or Bachelor of Science (B.S.). These are usually primarily undergraduate institutions, although some might have limited programs at the graduate level. Many students earn an associate's degree at a two-year institution before transferring to a four-year institution for another two years to earn a bachelor's degree.[11]
Four-year institutions in the U.S. which emphasize the liberal arts are liberal arts colleges. These colleges traditionally emphasize interactive instruction (although research is still a component of these institutions). They are known for being residential and for having smaller enrollment, class size, and higher teacher-student ratios than universities; a typical liberal arts college is pictured on the right. These colleges also encourage a high level of teacher-student interaction at the center of which are classes taught by full-time faculty rather than graduate student teaching assistants (TAs), who do teach classes at some Research I and other universities. Most are private, although there are public liberal arts colleges. In addition, some offer experimental curricula, such as Hampshire College, Beloit College, Bard College at Simon's Rock, Pitzer College, Sarah Lawrence College, Grinnell College, Bennington College, New College of Florida, and Reed College.
Universities are research-oriented institutions which provide both undergraduate and graduate education. For historical reasons, some universities—such as Boston College, Dartmouth College, and The College of William & Mary—have retained the term "college," while some institutions granting few graduate degrees, such as Wesleyan University, use the term "university." Graduate programs grant a variety of master's degrees—such as the Master of Arts (M.A.), Master of Science (M.S.), Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.), or Master of Fine Arts (M.F.A.)—in addition to doctorates such as the Ph.D. The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education distinguishes among institutions on the basis of the prevalence of degrees they grant and considers the granting of master's degrees necessary, though not sufficient, for an institution to be classified as a university.[12]
Some universities have professional schools, which are attended primarily by those who plan to be practitioners instead of academics (scholars/researchers). Examples include journalism school, business school, medical schools (which award either the M.D. or D.O.), law schools (J.D.), veterinary schools (D.V.M.), pharmacy schools (Pharm.D.), and dental schools. A common practice is to refer to different units within universities as colleges or schools (what is referred to in other countries as faculties). Some colleges may be divided into departments–such as an anthropology department within a college of liberal arts and sciences within a larger university.
Except for the United States service academies and staff colleges, the federal government does not directly regulate universities, although it can give federal grants to them. The majority of public universities are operated by the states and territories, usually as part of a state university system. Each state supports at least one state university and several support many more. California, for example, has three public higher education systems: the 11-campus University of California, the 23-campus California State University, and the 109-campus California Community Colleges System. Public universities often have a large student body, with introductory classes numbering in the hundreds and some undergraduate classes taught by graduate students. Tribal colleges operated on Indian reservations by some federally recognized tribes are also public institutions.
Many private universities also exist. Among these, some are secular while others are involved in religious education. Some are non-denominational and some are affiliated with a certain sect or church, such as Roman Catholicism (with different institutions often sponsored by particular religious orders such as the Jesuits) or religions such as Lutheranism or Mormonism. Seminaries are private institutions for those preparing to become members of the clergy. Most private schools (like all public schools) are non-profit, although some are for-profit.
Tuition is charged at almost all American universities, except 1) the five federally sponsored service academies, in which students attend free and with a stipend in exchange for a service commitment in the U.S. armed forces after graduation; and 2) a few institutions where offering tuition-free education is part of their mission, such as Cooper Union, Berea College, Olin College and Webb Institute. Public universities often have much lower tuition than private universities because funds are provided by state governments and residents of the state that supports the university typically pay lower tuition than non-residents. Students often use scholarships, student loans, or grants, rather than paying all tuition out-of-pocket. Several states offer scholarships that allow students to attend free of tuition or at lesser cost; examples include HOPE in Georgia and Bright Futures in Florida.
Most universities, public and private, have endowments. A January 2007 report by the National Association of College and University Business Officers revealed that the top 765 U.S. colleges and universities had a combined $340 billion in endowment assets as of 2006. The largest endowment is that of Harvard University, at $29 billion.[13]
The majority of both liberal arts colleges and public universities are coeducational; the number of women's colleges and men's colleges has dwindled in past years and nearly all remaining single-sex institutions are private liberal arts colleges. There are historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), both private (such as Morehouse College) and public (such as Florida A&M).
Religious denominations established most early colleges in order to train ministers. In New England there was an emphasis on literacy so that people could read the Bible. Harvard College was founded by the colonial legislature in 1636, and named after an early benefactor. Most of the funding came from the colony, but the college early began to collect endowment. Harvard at first focused on training young men for the ministry, and won general support from the Puritan colonies. The College of William & Mary was founded by Virginia government in 1693, with 20,000 acres (81 km2) of land for an endowment, and a penny tax on every pound of tobacco, together with an annual appropriation. James Blair, the leading Anglican minister in the colony, was president for 50 years, and the college won the broad support of the Virginia gentry, most of whom were Anglicans, and trained many of the lawyers, politicians, and leading planters. Students headed for the ministry were given free or in tuition. Yale College was founded in 1701, and in 1716 was relocated to New Haven, Connecticut. The conservative Puritan ministers of Connecticut had grown dissatisfied with the more liberal theology of Harvard, and wanted their own school to train orthodox ministers. New Side Presbyterians in 1747 set up the College of New Jersey, in the town of Princeton; much later it was renamed Princeton University. Rhode Island College was begun by the Baptists in 1764, and in 1804 it was renamed Brown University in honor of a benefactor. Brown was especially liberal in welcoming young men from other denominations. In New York City, the Anglicans set up King's College in 1746, with its president Doctor Samuel Johnson the only teacher. It closed during the American Revolution, and reopened in 1784 under the name of Columbia College; it is now Columbia University. The Academy of Pennsylvania was created in 1749 by Benjamin Franklin and other civic minded leaders in Philadelphia, and unlike the others was not oriented toward the training of ministers. It was renamed the University of Pennsylvania in 1791. the Dutch Reform Church in 1766 set up Queen's College in New Jersey, which later became Rutgers University. Dartmouth College, chartered in 1769, grew out of school for Indians, and was moved to its present site in Hanover, New Hampshire, in 1770.[14][15]
All of the schools were small, with a limited undergraduate curriculum oriented on the liberal arts. Students were drilled in Greek, Latin, geometry, ancient history, logic, ethics and rhetoric, with few discussions and no lab sessions. The college president typically enforced strict discipline, and the upperclassman enjoyed hazing the freshman. Many students were younger than 17, and most of the colleges also operated a preparatory school. There were no organized sports, or Greek-letter fraternities, but literary societies were active. Tuition was very low and scholarships were few.[16]
There were no schools of law in the colonies. However, a few lawyers studied at the highly prestigious Inns of Court in London, while the majority served apprenticeships with established American lawyers.[17] Law was very well established in the colonies, compared to medicine, which was in rudimentary condition. In the 18th century, 117 Americans had graduated in medicine in Edinburgh, Scotland, but most physicians learned as apprentices in the colonies.[18] In Philadelphia, the Medical College of Philadelphia was founded in 1765, and became affiliated with the university in 1791. In New York, the medical department of King's College was established in 1767, and in 1770 awarded the first American M.D. degree.[19]
Summarizing the research of Burke and Hall, Katz concludes that in the 19th century:.[20]
In the United States, the term college is frequently used to refer to stand-alone higher level education institutions that are not components of a university as well as to refer to components within a university. Stand-alone institutions that call themselves colleges are universities in the international sense of the term. Typically in the United States, a university is composed of an academically diverse set of units called schools or colleges, whereas a college—whether it is a stand-alone institution of higher learning or a component within a university—typically focuses on one academic sector that is self-chosen by that institution, where that college is composed of departments within that sector. Note that the multiple colleges or schools composing a university are typically collocated on the same university campus or near each other on adjacent campuses within the same metropolitan area. Unlike colleges versus universities in other portions of the world, a stand-alone college is truly stand-alone and is not part of a university, and is also not affiliated with an affiliating university.
Each institution may choose from several different schemes of organization using the terms, in most-macroscopic to most-microscopic order: university, college, school, division, department, and office. To illustrate the finer points of how these terms are used, consider four example institutions:
In the Purdue University example, a college as a component of the university is a topical decomposition, focused on an academic sector of directly related academic disciplines. In the Brown University example, a college as a component of the university focuses on the undergraduate mission. In the Dartmouth College example of a college as a stand-alone institution, a college focusing on the undergraduate mission is the prevailing but distinct identity of what is arguably a university when the collective of college and schools are considered. In the Carleton College example, the purest example of the USA's use of the term college is displayed in two ways:
Students can apply to some colleges using the Common Application. There is no limit to the number of colleges or universities to which a student may apply, though an application must be submitted for each. With a few exceptions, most undergraduate colleges and universities maintain the policy that students are to be admitted to (or rejected from) the entire college, not to a particular department or major. (This is unlike college admissions in many European countries, as well as graduate admissions.) Some students, rather than being rejected, are "wait-listed" for a particular college and may be admitted if another student who was admitted decides not to attend the college or university. The five major parts of admission are ACT/SAT scores, GPA, College Application, Essay, and Letters of Recommendation.[21] Not all colleges require essays or letters of recommendation, though they are often proven to increase chances of acceptance.
Numerous organizations produce rankings of universities in the United States each year. A 2010 University of Michigan study has confirmed that the rankings in the United States have significantly affected colleges' applications and admissions. [22]Referred to as the "granddaddy of the college rankings", [23] America's best–known American college and university rankings have been compiled since 1983 by U.S. News & World Report and are widely regarded as the most influential of all college rankings.[24]
On 19 June 2007, during the annual meeting of the Annapolis Group, members discussed the letter to college presidents asking them not to participate in the "reputation survey" section of the U.S. News & World Report survey (this section comprises 25% of the ranking). As a result, "a majority of the approximately 80 presidents at the meeting said that they did not intend to participate in the U.S. News reputational rankings in the future." [25] However, the decision to fill out the reputational survey or not will be left up to each individual college as: "the Annapolis Group is not a legislative body and any decision about participating in the US News rankings rests with the individual institutions." [26] The statement also said that its members "have agreed to participate in the development of an alternative common format that presents information about their colleges for students and their families to use in the college search process." [26] This database will be web based and developed in conjunction with higher education organizations including the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities and the Council of Independent Colleges.
On 22 June 2007, U.S. News and World Report editor Robert Morse issued a response in which he argued, "in terms of the peer assessment survey, we at U.S. News firmly believe the survey has significant value because it allows us to measure the "intangibles" of a college that we can't measure through statistical data. Plus, the reputation of a school can help get that all-important first job and plays a key part in which grad school someone will be able to get into. The peer survey is by nature subjective, but the technique of asking industry leaders to rate their competitors is a commonly accepted practice. The results from the peer survey also can act to level the playing field between private and public colleges." [27] In reference to the alternative database discussed by the Annapolis Group, Morse also argued, "It's important to point out that the Annapolis Group's stated goal of presenting college data in a common format has been tried before [...] U.S. News has been supplying this exact college information for many years already. And it appears that NAICU will be doing it with significantly less comparability and functionality. U.S. News first collects all these data (using an agreed-upon set of definitions from the Common Data Set). Then we post the data on our website in easily accessible, comparable tables. In other words, the Annapolis Group and the others in the NAICU initiative actually are following the lead of U.S. News." [27]
An Ohio University professor and member of the Commission on the Future of Higher Education, has been a vocal critic of how institutions of higher education are financed. He claimed that tuition increases have rapidly outpaced inflation; that productivity in higher education has fallen or remained stagnant; and that third-party tuition payments from government or private sources have insulated students from bearing the full cost of their education, allowing costs to rise more rapidly.[28] According to Robert E. Wright, tuition costs will continue to rise rapidly without attendant increases in quality until professors are encouraged to own colleges in private partnership, like attorneys and that that won't happen until barriers to entry are decreased and government education subsidies are paid directly to students instead of to colleges and universities.[29] A report in The Economist criticized American universities for generally losing sight of how to contain costs.[30] Second-tier schools with Ivy League Envy had become "so obsessed with rising up the academic hierarchy" that they focus too much on research while neglecting undergraduate education, and the report chronicled an environment in which universities have been slow to embrace Internet technology and online software to streamline costs.[30]
Another issue is the rising cost of textbooks.[31] There are textbook exchanges for students who will accept a used text at a lower price. Lower priced alternatives offered by Flat World Knowledge are now available but have yet to make a significant impact on overall textbook prices.
Many students lack the financial resources to pay tuition up front and must rely on student loans and scholarships from their university, the federal government, or a private lender. All but a few charity institutions, and the United States Service academies, charge students tuition, although scholarships (both merit-based and need-based) are widely available. Generally, private universities charge much higher tuition than their public counterparts, which rely on state funds to make up the difference. Because each state supports its own university system with state taxes, most public universities charge much higher rates for out-of-state students. In 2002, state governments gave their state colleges a total of $66 billion to partially subsidize students tuition. The average tuition then of a state college was $4,081 annually for a four-year college. The average cost of a private school was $18,273.[32]
The total cost of all higher education in 2002 was $289 billion.[32]
Annual undergraduate tuition varies widely from state to state, and many additional fees apply. In 2009, average annual tuition at a public university (for residents of the state) was $7,020.[33] Tuition for public school students from outside the state is generally comparable to private school prices, although students can often qualify for state residency after their first year. Private schools are typically much higher, although prices vary widely from "no-frills" private schools to highly specialized technical institutes. Depending upon the type of school and program, annual graduate program tuition can vary from $15,000 to as high as $50,000. Note that these prices do not include living expenses (rent, room/board, etc.) or additional fees that schools add on such as "activities fees" or health insurance. These fees, especially room and board, can range from $6,000 to $12,000 per academic year (assuming a single student without children).[34]
In 2010, community colleges cost an average of $2,544 per year for tuition and fees. A private 4-year college cost an average of $26,273 annually for tuition and fees.[36]
College costs are rising at the same time that state appropriations for aid are shrinking. This has led to debate over funding at both the state and local levels. From 2002 to 2004 alone, tuition rates at public schools increased by just over 14 percent, largely due to dwindling state funding. A more moderate increase of 6 percent occurred over the same period for private schools.[34] Between 1982 and 2007, college tuition and fees rose three times as fast as median family income, in constant dollars.[37]
To combat costs colleges have hired adjunct professors to teach. In 2008 these teachers cost about $1,800 per 3-credit class as opposed to $8,000 per class for a tenured professor. Two-thirds of college instructors were adjuncts. There are differences of opinion whether these adjuncts teach better or worse than regular professors. There is a suspicion that student evaluation of adjuncts, along with their subsequent continued employment, can lead to grade inflation.[38]
Princeton sociologists Thomas Espenshade and Alexandria Walton Radford published a book-length study of admissions that found that an upper-middle-class white applicant was three times more likely to be admitted to an American college than a lower-class white with similar qualification. New York Times columnist Ross Douthat has cited this as an example of how U.S. universities can exacerbate wealth inequality.[39] A 2006 report by Future of Children, a collaboration of Princeton and the Brookings Institution, concluded that "the current process of admission to, enrollment in, and graduation from colleges and universities contributes to economic inequality as measured by income and wealth."[40]
Every state has an entity designed to promote coordination and collaboration between higher education institutions. A few are listed:
In the 1980s and 1990s significant changes in the economics of academic life began to be felt, identified by some as a catastrophe in the making and by others as a new era with potentially huge gains for the university. Some critics identified the changes as a new "corporatization of the university." Academic jobs have been traditionally viewed by many intellectuals as desirable, because of the autonomy and intellectual freedom they allow (especially because of the tenure system), despite their low pay compared to other professions requiring extensive education. And until the mid-1970s, when federal expenditures for higher education fell sharply, there were routinely more tenure-track jobs than Ph.D. graduates.
Now, by contrast, despite rising tuition rates and growing university revenues (especially in the U.S.) well-paid professorial positions are rarer, replaced with poorly paid adjunct positions and graduate-student labor. People with doctorates in the sciences, and to a lesser extent mathematics, often find jobs outside of academia (or use part-time work in industry to supplement their incomes), but a Ph.D. in the humanities and many social sciences prepares the student primarily for academic employment. However, in recent years a large proportion of such Ph.D.s—ranging from 30 percent to 60 percent—have been unable to obtain tenure-track jobs. They must choose between adjunct positions, which are poorly paid and lack job security; teaching jobs in community colleges or in high schools, where little research is done; the non-academic job market, where they will tend to be overqualified; or some other course of study, such as law or business.
Indeed, with academic institutions producing Ph.D.s in greater numbers than the number of tenure-track professorial positions they intend to create, there is little question that administrators are cognizant of the economic effects of this arrangement. The sociologist Stanley Aronowitz wrote: "Basking in the plenitude of qualified and credentialed instructors, many university administrators see the time when they can once again make tenure a rare privilege, awarded only to the most faithful and to those whose services are in great demand".[41]
Most people who are knowledgeable of the academic job market advise prospective graduate students not to attend graduate school if they must pay for it; graduate students who are admitted without tuition remission and a reasonable stipend are forced to incur large debts that they will be unlikely to repay quickly. In addition, most people recommend that students obtain full and accurate information about the placement record of the programs they are considering. At some programs, most Ph.D.s get multiple tenure-track offers, whereas at others few obtain any; such information is clearly very useful in deciding what to do with the next 5–7 years of one's life.
Some believe that, as a number of Baby Boomer professors retire, the academic job market will rebound. However, others predict that this will not result in an appreciable growth of tenure-track positions, as universities will merely fill their needs with low-paid adjunct positions. Aronowitz ascribed this problem to the economic restructuring of academia as a whole:
In fact, the program of restructuring on university campuses, which entails reducing full-time tenure-track positions in favor of part-time, temporary, and contingent jobs, has literally "fabricated" this situation. The idea of an academic "job market" based on the balance of supply and demand in an open competitive arena is a fiction whose effect is to persuade the candidate that (he or she) simply lost out because of bad luck or lack of talent. The truth is otherwise.[42]
The effects of a growing pool of unemployed, underemployed, and undesirably employed Ph.D.s on many countries' economies as a whole is undetermined.
262,416 American students studied outside the country in 2007-8. More than 140,000 of these are studying in Europe.[43]
671,616 foreign students enrolled in American colleges in 2008-9.[44] This figure rose to 723,277 in 2010-2011. The largest number, 157,558, came from China.[45]
The portion of state budget funding spent on higher education has decreased by 40 percent since 1978, while at the same time most tuition fees have significantly increased. [46] Between 2000 and 2010, the cost of tuition and room and board at public universities increased by 37 percent. [47] During the early 1980’s, higher education funding saw a shift from reliance on state and federal government funding, to a greater reliance on family contributions and student loans. Pell Grants, which were created to offset the cost of college for low-income students, started funding more middle-class students, stretching the funds thinner for everyone. During the mid-1990’s only 34 percent of the cost for college was covered by the maximum offered Pell Grant, compared to 84 percent during the 1970’s.[48]
The federal government also began funding less grant programs and more loan programs, leaving students with higher amounts of debt. In 2003, almost 70 percent of federal student aid awarded was student loans, which was a much higher percentage than just a decade before.[49] The National Center for Education Statistics reports that during the 2007-2008 school year, 66 percent of degree recipients had borrowed money to complete their degree. On average, their borrowed amount was $24,700. 36 percent of the graduates had to borrow from state or private sources, averaging total loan amounts of 13,900 and 95 percent of these loans were private.[50] One estimate of total debt of all ex-students in 2011 was $1 trillion.[30] Furthermore, the economic troubles of the recent decade has left higher education funding being shifted towards other needs because higher education institutions have the ability to gain extra funds through raising tuition and private donations.[51]
Policy changes in higher education funding raise questions about the impact on student performance and access to higher education. Many early studies focused on social integration and a person’s individual attributes as the factors for degree completion. [52] More recent studies have begun to look at larger factors including state funding and financial support.It has been found that providing need-based aid proved to increase degree completion in 48 states.There has also been a positive correlation between providing merit-based aid and degree completion. [53] Also, as the level to qualify for state need-based aid is lowered, the probability of persistence increases. Low-income families now have to pay more to attend college, making it harder for such populations to attain higher education. In 1980, low-income families had to use 13 percent of their income to pay for one year of college. In 2000, this proportion grew to 25 percent of their income, while high-income families use less than 5 percent of their income. [54]
Most discussions on how higher education funding is determined have focused on the economic and demographic influences; however, according to a 2010 study on the relationship between politics and state funding many political factors influence higher education funding. First, as the number of interest groups for higher education in a state grows, so does the amount of money given to higher education. Second, states with a more liberal political ideology give more funding to higher education. Third, governors with more control over the state budget tend to award less money to higher education. This is attributed again to the fact that higher education funding is considered to be tradable with other programs. Fourth, a more professional state legislature correlates with more funding for higher education. Professional in this situation is referring to a legislature that acts similarly to the U.S. Congress in terms of having a large amount of staff members and spending more time in session. Fifth, the more diverse a state population becomes, the less support there will be for higher education funding. [55]
Different societal factors such as socioeconomic status can play a part in one’s chances of taking advantage of higher education. A 2011 national study found that college students with a high socioeconomic status persisted in college 25 percent more than students with a low socioeconomic status. [56] In fact, students with a high socioeconomic status are 1.55 times more likely to persist in college than students with a low socioeconomic status. A 2007 study found that only 52 percent of low-income students who qualified for college enrolled within 2 years of graduation compared to 83 percent of high-income students. [57] Attaining even higher degrees than a bachelor’s degree can also be affected by socioeconomic status. A 2008 study reports that only 11 percent of students with low socioeconomic status report earning a master’s, medical, or law degree compared to 42 percent of high socioeconomic students. [58]
Socioeconomic status can also effect which populations begin higher education after high school graduation. The National Center for Education Statistics reports that in 2009 high school graduates from low-income families enrolled in college immediately at a rate of 55 percent. In comparison, 84 percent of high school graduates from high-income families enrolled immediately into college. Middle-class families also saw lower rates with 67 percent enrolling in college immediately. [59] As the level of socioeconomic status increases, so does the likelihood that the student will enroll in college at some point. It also found that a high percentage of students who delayed enrollment in college attended high schools that had a high level of participation in the free and reduced lunch program. Furthermore, students who had access to financial aid contacts were more likely to enroll in higher education than students who did not have these contacts. [60]
Socioeconomic status can also influence performance rates once at a university. According to a 2008 study, students with a low socioeconomic status study less, work more hours, have less interaction with faculty, and are less likely to join extra-curricular clubs and groups. 42 percent of students with low socioeconomic status indicated that they worked more than 16 hours a week during school, with a high percentage working up to 40 hours a week., [61]
Race can also play a part in a student’s persistence rate in college. Drop out rates are highest with the Native American and African American population, both with drop out rates greater than 50 percent. [62] Caucasians and Asian Americans had the lowest dropout rates. Race can also play a part in which students even enroll in college. A 2007 study found that African Americans are more likely to delay enrolling in college. [63] The National Center for Education Statistics reports that between 2003 and 2009 rates of immediate college enrollment increased for Asian Americans and Whites, but not for African Americans [64] The 2011 Condition of Education study found that in 2008, 63 percent of college students were white, while only 14 percent were African American and 12 percent were Hispanic. [65]
It is estimated that 65,000 unauthorized immigrants graduate from high school each year. These graduates have lived in the United States for more than 5 years and most were often brought to the United States by their parents as young children. [66] This leaves the U.S. Government with the question of what rights to give the unauthorized immigrants after their graduation, particularly with access to higher education. A 2010 study conducted at the University of Nevada Las Vegas on unauthorized immigrants and higher education:
Installing pathways to higher education and in-state tuition for undocumented students in the United States presents both opportunities and constraints in developing practices that promote social justice, equity, and equality. Those who are sympathetic to the challenges facing undocumented students may support opportunities to promote the potential of those who are deserving of incorporation and membership in U.S. society. On the other hand, proponents of tighter borders and tougher immigration laws may view all undocumented people, including model, hardworking young people, as “illegals” or temporary workers and consider them to be drains on the resources of society. This puts educational administrators in precarious positions since they are professionals who are trained to promote and support students in their pursuit of knowledge and self-improvement. Therefore, many professionals are left with little choice but to search for individuals and resources already established within outlaw cultures.” [67]
In 1996, the United States passed a law banning states from offering residency benefits to unauthorized immigrants that they didn’t then also offer to every U.S. citizen. This basically made it so that states could not offer in-state tuition to unauthorized immigrants, even if they technically qualified based on residency status. States have argued the clarity of this law and many have enacted their own laws allowing in-state tuition to be given on the claims that it’s based on high school attendance and not explicitly residency. [68] This law is especially important since unauthorized immigrants are also unable to obtain governmental financial aid and are unable to legally work, leaving them without sources to help pay for out-of-state tuition. [69]
The Dream Act was introduced in 2001 and aims to give more access to higher education for unauthorized immigrants by repealing the law 1996 law. It also aimed to set up pathways for students who obtain higher education to become legal residents. The act has been introduced in many states and many different times, but has still not been passed. Critics of the act argue that it rewards the illegal actions of the immigrants and encourages more people to try and illegally immigrate to the US. They also argue that a financial burden could be placed on taxpayers. Proponents argue the opposite, emphasizing that giving the unauthorized immigrants an opportunity at higher education means they will be more self-sufficient in the future, contributing more to taxes and relying less on state resources. They also claim that children should not be punished for the actions of their parents and that giving them this opportunity would encourage them to be contributing and law abiding citizens. Whether this act would have positive effects on unauthorized immigrants attending college is still hard to see since not many states have actually done it and the time span has not been enough for thorough research. [70]
The 2010 University of Nevada Las Vegas study recommends key policy changes to support unauthorized immigrants access to higher education.
In general, practitioners need to weigh opportunities against constraints and consider the potential opportunities to promote social justice, equality, and equity in higher education access. Rather than considering undocumented students as “illegals” and restricting their access to legitimate educational pathways, it is recommended that, at the very least, those in positions of power adopt an outlaw cultural framework to support the strengths inherent within diversity as well as pursue avenues of social justice for undocumented students who are seeking to access higher education to improve their future and secure permanent membership in U.S. society. [71]
Although academic degrees usually lead to more lucrative careers than community college diplomas, that tendency varies among the different majors. Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce has released a study which essentially claims that colleges are not informing freshmen about the career prospects of various academic majors, thereby training many students for low-paying careers with a substantial risk of unemployment and intractable debt problems.[72] For example, majors in engineering, business administration, health care, computer science and mathematics usually lead to well-paid and secure jobs. On the other hand, majors in psychology and social work, the arts, education, the humanities and liberal arts, communication and journalism result in too many graduates competing for available job opportunities. Even if they do get jobs, they are often vulnerable to layoffs.
There has been rapid growth in recent years of for-profit schools, of which the University of Phoenix is the largest with an enrollment over 400,000 nationwide. Other large institutions, with numerous branch campuses and online programs include Devry and Kaplan University. Altogether, they enroll 9% of the students. They have aggressively recruited among military veterans, and in 2010 received 36% percent of all the tuition aid paid by the federal government. The University of Phoenix received 88% of its income from federal aid to students; the maximum allowed is 90%. In 2001 the University of Phoenix opened a two-year online program oriented toward lower-income students who receive federal financial aid; in 2010 it had over 200,000 students seeking two-year degrees. Critics have pointed to the heavy dependence on federal loans and grants to students, the low student completion rate, and the inability of the majority of graduates to pay their student loans because they failed to secure high-paying jobs.[73] The University of Phoenix reports that in 2009, 23% of its students completed an associate degree within three years of enrolling, and for bachelor’s degree students, its six-year completion rate was 34%.[74]
The amount of debt that students have after graduation has become an issue of concern, especially given the weak job market after 2008.[75] Some loans are financed by the federal government, but students sometimes obtain private loans (which generally have higher interest rates and start accumulating interest immediately). In 2010, the U.S. Department of Education announced stricter eligibility rules for federal financing of loans to student at for-profit schools, which were experiencing higher default rates.[76]
Research since the 1970s have consistently found that professors are more liberal and Democratic than the general population.[77][78][79] Surveys conducted in the last 10 years show that between 44%-62% faculty self-identify as liberal, while only 9%-18% self-identify as conservative. Conservative self-identification is substantially higher in two-year colleges than other categories of higher education and has been declining overall.[80] Those in natural sciences, engineering, and business were less liberal than those in the social sciences and humanities. A 2005 study found that liberal views had increased compared to the older studies. Only 15% in the survey described themselves as right of center. While the humanities and the social sciences are still the most left leaning, 67% of those in other fields combined described themselves as left of center. Even in business and engineering, liberals outnumber conservatives by a 2:1 ratio. The study also found that women, practicing Christians, and Republicans taught at lower quality schools than would be expected from objectively measured professional accomplishments.[81][82] Groupthink has been suggested as explaining why liberals are overrepresented.[83]
A 2007 study criticized some recent surveys, such as the above 2005 study, on methodological grounds as well as being motivated by conservative concerns. It also pointed to the influence of conservative think tanks outside academia. In its own survey it found that while conservatives were rare, there was a large centrist group between those self-identifying as liberals or conservatives. More moderate views were more common in younger professors, although also in this age group liberals were several times more common than conservatives. The age group with most liberal professors were the professors who were teenagers or young adults in the radical 1960s. Of all surveyed, 3% identified themselves as Marxists with the highest numbers being in social sciences (17%) and humanities (5%).[84][85]
A 2011 study disagreed with younger professors being more moderate and instead argued that the average view may shift further left in the future. The study also found that the years of college education had little effect on the political view of undergraduates. There was little evidence that right leaning professors were treated poorly. However, they may have difficulty publishing with a cited study finding that ouf of 494 books published by Harvard University Press only eight were conservative or classical liberal in orientation. Regarding the cause of the liberal overrepresentation, it found that conservative students preferred to major in fields leading to immediate employment, such as hotel management or accounting, rather than further studies.[86][87] Self-selection has also been suggested by others as the main explanation.[88][89]
In one study the researchers sent out e-mails to graduate studies directors at top ranked departments. They claimed to be an undergraduate asking for guidance regarding if this was a suitable department. The e-mails differed regarding which presidential campaign the undergraduate had worked for. There was no statical difference in the replies. On the other hand, a survey of sociology professors found that one quarter stated that they would be more likely to vote for hiring a declared Democrat and less likely to vote for hiring a declared Republican. Around 40% stated that they would be less likely to vote for hiring an Evangelical or a member of the National Rifle Association. Another survey found a similar situation for humanities and other social sciences professors.[90]
There are both older[91][92][93] and more recent (such as The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America) right-wing criticisms regarding the political views of the academia and the effects of these as well as counter-criticisms against these views.[94][95][96]
A 2007 poll found that 58% of Americans thought that college professors' political bias was a "serious problem". This varied depending on the political views of those asked. 91% of "very conservative" adults agreed compared with only 3% of liberals.[97]
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||