Reacting to "Where College Fails Us"

In her article, "Where College Fails Us," Carolina Bird argues that, despite the prevailing beliefs in 1975 (the year in which the article was written), not everyone should go to college.

She cites the growing number of diplomas handed out in certain fields and reports it against the number of new jobs in those fields, showing that there is a vast surplus of trained workers in these fields, which has obvious economic consequences. In addition, she tells us that college creates a caste system of sorts, separating and giving an unfair advantage to those with diplomas when the time comes to look for a job. She also reports that a student investing his college tuition in the bank instead of an education is likely to come out with a large amount more than the comparatively better pay he would make if he had spent it on college. She even tells us that college usually does not teach us a great deal that is "vocationally useful," but instead gives us a lot of useless knowledge.

She concludes by painting a rather cynical view of college: That a large number of professors are unqualified, that colleges take a "hands-off" attitude toward a student's well-being, that more and more students are going to college reluctantly, and that very few of them go for the purpose of actually improving the world. She rounds off this argument by saying that college provides no direction to a young person, and is therefore not worthwhile for a vast majority of high school graduates.

She makes some good points, of course. It's true: College is expensive (Total costs for a year here at USC crest the $50,000 mark), it provides many people with a diploma they will choose or be forced not to use (My mom is a prime example - she has three undergraduate degrees, none of them in music, and works as a freelance harpist), and it fills us with some knowledge we will not use. It also does bias some employers toward hiring those with degrees. As for a university's attitude, she is probably close to the mark here, too, at least for some schools: Housing and meals are overpriced and substandard in many cases, and the school will perpetuate this cycle to make a profit.

I disagree with her on her fundamental points, however. In my experience thus far, I have found that I have changed substantially because I came to college, mostly for the better. Instead of having unqualified teachers, I have received a great deal of world-class instruction in many areas, especially music (my major is vocal arts), but also in incredibly diverse areas such as ancient philosophy and foreign language. Personally, I have found new levels of responsibility, maturity, and social growth.

If I had lacked direction when I came in, I have a feeling that I would have found it here. I have been guided by a great deal of people who have certainly done their part to improve my future already, and my second semester has just started. The bottom line is that by the time I graduate, I will have acquired a skill set that I did not have upon graduation from high school, and this skill set will be essential for succeeding (and by succeeding, I mean performing a job that I love and that earns me the money I need to survive) in the world.

The author does a good job of pointing out the flaws in a decidedly flawed system, but she is guilty of that which she explicitly warns against in her introduction: Mass character assassination. She generalizes about colleges everywhere when looking at the pitfalls of several institutions. The system is flawed, yes, but it is certainly not beyond repair. I have experienced, for instance, the fact that USC is most certainly a for-profit institution, but, as I stated before, I have gotten a great deal out of my time here. Take it from the poor kid: The outrageous costs and money-making schemes on the part of the university are not desirable, but they are worth it in the long run.

So is college for everyone? It must be admitted that it is probably not. But instead of using that presumption to bash the education system, it would be more constructive and better for everyone if we use it to improve the system to cater to the needs of the great We the People. After all, isn't that what it should be for?