Promises of higher education go unrealized for new graduates
In middle school, my history teacher referred to my entire seventh-grade class as the “microwave generation.” He felt that collectively we were too intent on getting everything we want right now - no room left for patience. In high school, the media referred to my class as the “Rx generation.” We were kids who, apparently, had a deep-seated love for prescription medicines.
I’ve just graduated from college, and I think now we are the forgotten generation.
Elise Baun
Every time I turn on the television, I quickly learn that America is currently having a health care crisis. But I have yet to hear about the education crisis. Education is kept on the back burner until someone who knows that there is a problem cares enough to fix it.
At my college commencement, the economic climate was referred to as an obstacle that each lucky graduate needed to hurtle. By the time the president of my university referred to our unfortunate situation, the entire crowd groaned because they were tired of hearing about how hard it was going to be for us to get jobs (every other speaker had already tried to stress to us how hard the next couple of years were going to be). Suddenly all students were talking about was how to stay in school. After 18 years of being told to go to college, we were now expected to stay just a little bit longer. We graduated just in time to realize that the master’s is the new bachelor’s.
Barack Obama needed the college kids to get elected; we played an integral part of his campaign, but the education crisis is one mountain he has yet to even start to climb. America is now a debt society; we’re immersed in it, drowning even.
And the college students are just the beginning. Suddenly college is a necessity with the price tag of a commodity and the pay out is non-existent. Going back to school means that we will be in even more debt, but not going back means we can’t pay the loans we already have - our personal catch-22.
Rising federal financial aid, both federally and at the school level helps. But the Federal Application for Student Aid does not take into account certain things like how much your parents made before they got a raise. My parents did not earn enough money when I was younger to be able to save money for my education. But now my dad makes enough money that it looks like he should be able to pay my tuition, along with my brother’s and twin sister’s tuitions. That is why I have taken out a loan for every year I have been in school.
College will never be a reality for most high school graduates if the government does not make a real effort to address the education crisis.
I am planning on starting law school in the fall. My first two criterions for which school I plan on attending are cost and average starting salary of a law school graduate. My whole hope is that I will finally be able to make enough money to pay back my education loans.
Elise Baun grew up in Stevensville, Mich., and now lives in Ann Arbor. She is a recent graduate of the University of Michigan.
Comments
tulpenfeld
Mon, Apr 12, 2010 : 2:45 a.m.
I am planning on starting law school in the fall. My first two criterions for which school I plan on attending are cost and average starting salary of a law school graduate. My whole hope is that I will finally be able to make enough money to pay back my education loans. Ms.Baun, I respectfully urge you to do more research before attending law school. The business model for law firms is changing dramatically. You simply will not be able to make the amount of money that you think you can. Law schools may not explain this fully to you because it is in their best interest to report higher salary numbers so as to legitimize high tuition fees. Additionally, there are way too many people using law school as a refuge; the legal job market is flooded. This problem has been an issue for some time, but the economic downturn made a bad situation worse. This means that it will be increasingly more difficult to get one of the relatively higher paying firm jobs. You (along with a lot of other people) have no idea what you are getting yourself into. I recommend that you talk to younger attorneys (i.e., 7 years or less out of law school) who work in major markets (DC, NYC, Boston, etc.). More senior attorneys have nowhere near the debt load of younger attorneys so they just don't get it. Also, the tightness in the big legal markets will start happening in the smaller ones; it is all related. Finally, I suggest that you start regularly reading some blogs that will help to manage your expectations; Above the Law and The Wall Street Journals Law Blog would be a good start. I wish you the best in finding your way.
Jake C
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 11:17 p.m.
#1: Much like the idea that "everyone should be able to own a home" promoted by the Bush administration, the idea that "everyone should get a college education" is one of the great false ideas of our times. While it would be *nice* for everyone to get a higher education, having a 100% college-educated populace would leave no one to work at McDonalds, or Starbucks, or Home Depot, unless we feel we need an entry-level workforce with no relevant skills and $50,000 in loan debt to pay off over 30 years. And given today's political climate, no one apparently wants to pay for someone's "free" college education unless they're personally getting something out of it. #2: Very little of the current jobs crisis has to do with policies that Obama has or has not implemented over the past 13 months. Our economy is so huge that any government intervention generally takes months to take effect in the jobs market. Not like anyone really cares about basic economic theory, all we seem to care about is getting results within days, if not hours. #3: InsideTheHall: How do you judge economic credentials? By people you agree with politically, by independent research, or just by what corporation makes the most money? I can think of nothing less appetizing than letting the Wall-Street-based business leaders that got us into the current economic disaster lead the next political administration. Why should we let people who value nothing more than short-term personal monetary profit write the country's economic policies (even more-so than they're doing today)? What guarantee would we have that they wouldn't completely drive us into the dirt in order to make a quick buck and then move to Costa Rica?
InsideTheHall
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 8:17 p.m.
The Obamabots will soon realize that a few more years of leeching off the parents healthcare plan is not sustainable. Until Obama learns to stimulate the economy, don't hold your breath, jobs will be scarce. In 2010/2012 we will see young people turn from Obama and look for politicans who have solid economic credentials who can kick start the private sector and create sustainable economic growth.
UM-Chris-13
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 5:19 p.m.
I would just like to respond to one of the above comments by noting that tax rates for every income bracket have decreased each year since 1981. That's through the terms of Reagan, Bush, Clinton, second Bush, and the first year of Obama. I don't think taxes are the problem here.
CynicA2
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 5:02 p.m.
The simple fact of the matter is, that if you look at the available supply of college grads, plus the number of experienced grads currently unemployed, vs. the number of available jobs in the U.S., there is NO shortage of reasonably qualified applicants for ANY profession or position. If you factor in the grads from foreign countries like China and India who are willing to work for less, the situation looks even worse. Their are relatively lots of nursing jobs in Ann Arbor, but I know of recent grads in nursing that can't find a nursing job locally to save their souls - unless they are willing to work around Detroit somewhere. Granted, Ann Arbor is a small pond to swim in, but still... The bottom line is that there are lots more people who want jobs nationwide, than there are jobs.
ChuckL
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 11:35 a.m.
Ginblossomarethebestbandever (nice handle!), You are missing a key point: why did tuition at UofM need to go up by 34.6% over a four year period? The grad students and non-tenured lecturers probably got increases of about 8% over that time, so once again, why did tuition at UofM need to go up by 34.6% over four years? Have you seen the cost of living in a dorm recently? It will be $1450/month for the 2010-2011 school year; why? Why should a dorm cost so much? Dorms use to be affordable housing, no more. Dorms are now luxury housing if judged by the cost (and really are luxury housing if you spend the money at the new digs that have gone up in Ann Arbor recently.) What I am suggesting is that the officials running our institutions of higher learning are subjecting the public to a sham. They are ripping the public off and it needs to change.
braggslaw
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 10:53 a.m.
My first comment was removed... So let me make the point in a different way. A college education does not entitle a person to a job. If someone specializes in a major that is not in market demand you will not get a job. If you major in engineering, accounting, nursing, biochem, physical therapy, etc. you will probably get a job. If you graduate with a liberal arts focused major- good luck.
Ben Mitchell
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 10:42 a.m.
I sympathize with the writer's sentiments. I'm a graduate student and the debt I've accumulated is pretty daunting. The cost of higher education certainly prices out a lot of students, however I think we should be careful in asking for increased government subsidies for higher education, as I think that easing cost barriers for college and graduate school may disproportionately benefit those people that would go to college anyways. It's more pronounced in China, India, and other developing countries, but I think to a degree the same holds true in this country. That is that those people that go to college are typically coming from middle to upper class families, have the benefit of good primary and secondary education, are the kids of parents who went to college themselves. I think we should bear in mind that for many people, cost is just one barrier to higher education. There are tremendous social and structural barriers that I think keep most people out of college. Using government resources to singly address the cost barrier could in fact be a regressive tax, as it would use government funds to remove a barrier to something that is by and large only accessed by the middle and upper class. Again, nice column by Ms. Baun, and an important issue to continue to raise awareness around.
Engineer
Sun, Apr 11, 2010 : 9:54 a.m.
It is truly unfortunate that many of the college kids of this great country were duped into voting for Owebama. Most middle aged hard working people I know had seen enough through life's experiences to not buy into his liberal fantasy ways that simply would not put this country back on track to properity. Hopefully in the next couple of election cycles we can get things turned around and get back to the greatness that this country is capable of with the proper conservative leadership that will work to reward those who put forth the effort to get a good education and not penalize them for that through higher and higher taxes.