The New York Times ran a story criticizing US College graduation rates. They note that the national average at public universities is abysmal.
This isn't particularly new, as our own 6-year graduation rate is just over 50%. However, the article notes that many good students are not going to the best schools they could, with high graduation rates. Instead they opt for the nearby choice, thereby greatly diminishing their chances of success.
The example would be, I suppose, that an excellent student would decide not to go to UW Madison (graduation rate 78%) and choose to stay nearby, say at Oshkosh. They would then be much less likely to finish.
The article goes on to note that better finances would help, as low income students drop out more often when tuition increases. There is even a suggestion that colleges don't mind, because freshmen are cheaper than upper-class students, because they get stuck with pit-classes. Failure generates more income--a perverse incentive!
They also raise the issue of culture, in that failing out of college has become acceptable.
Read and contemplate as we begin our new semester.
1 comment:
>>the article notes that many good students are not going to the best schools they could, with high graduation rates. Instead they opt for the nearby choice, thereby greatly diminishing their chances of success.<<
I do not recall when I last saw such a monstrous confusion of correlation and causality outside of a freshman lab report!
It is my firm belief that the tangible and intangible qualities of a university contribute but minimally to graduation rates. The lion's share of the blame or credit for graduation lies with the student. As with so many things for which universities are criticized, this falls under the heading of "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink."
It is the students who give Madison a 78% graduation rate, NOT Madison that gives its students a 78% chance of graduating!
Post a Comment