State of the Union

Obama's Failing Plan to Provide a "College Scorecard"

The Obama administration fails to provide real criteria for college rankings

|

The Obama State of the Union line that's attracting the most attention is the $9-an-hour minimum wage. But the policy initiative that's most illuminating in a certain way is the college scorecard.

The minimum wage is certainly telling. A friend emailed the day after the speech to ask, if the president really wanted to help the poor, why didn't he simply propose waiving, or cutting, the payroll tax for low-wage workers? 

The answer, of course, is that the proposal isn't about raising up the poor; it's about taking things away from the rich by forcing employers—i.e., small business owners or corporate shareholders—to pay a higher price for labor. Obama's goal isn't simply to help the poor, it's to reduce income inequality by redistributing wealth.

Less easy to pigeonhole ideologically was the president's promise that, "tomorrow, my administration will release a new 'College Scorecard' that parents and students can use to compare schools based on a simple criteria—where you can get the most bang for your educational buck."

Sure, on one level, this is a classic display of left-wing, big government hubris. There's already, after all, a highly robust market of information for students and parents choosing colleges or graduate schools. The U.S. News college and graduate school rankings seem to be right up there with the Sports Illustrated swimsuit issue in terms of newsstand special-issue money-makers. The U.S. News rankings are so influential that colleges have been caught lying to try to influence their rankings, or, more subtly, adjusting their policies to win better scores. The Washington Monthly magazine has its own set of rankings. A former higher education reporter for the New York Times, Edward Fiske, publishes a college guidebook. The staff of the Yale Daily News publishes its own annual Insider's Guide to colleges. 

Obama apparently thinks that the federal government should enter the college guide business to compete with the private sector players who are already there. Where in the Constitution this power is enumerated is anyone's guess. The administration placed such a high priority on the effort that the new federal College Scorecard ran right from the White House Web site, rather than from the Department of Education.

What I found most striking about the federal college scorecard was the narrowly vocational focus. "Knowledge and skills for the jobs of the future," is the way the White House Web site puts it. The final item on the scorecard for Harvard University in Cambridge, Mass., for Kaplan University in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and for just about every other university I checked is "employment," and reports that "the U.S. Department of Education is working to provide information about the average earnings of former undergraduate students at [name of university] who borrowed Federal student loans." 

Here, too, the government is competing with the private sector: a New York Times article noted that "PayScale, a company that analyzes payroll data for millions of workers, publishes annual rankings of colleges based on graduates' long-term earnings."

Maybe some students or parents will decide which college to attend based on where the graduates make the most money. But even that doesn't necessarily tell you much about how much value is being added by the university. Most students with the high school records to get admitted to Harvard or Yale or similar institutions would probably do pretty well in life even if they went to college somewhere else. And if "long-term earnings" are the only criterion, the dropouts—Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Steve Jobs, Michael Dell—are the ones to emulate. 

What's more, "Average earnings" or "long-term earnings" are imperfect measures. What about the lifetime earnings of some of my Harvard classmates who have chosen to be stay-at-home moms? Or the many other college graduates who pursue careers—the priesthood, the Peace Corps, teaching—whose psychic value isn't fully measured by salary statistics? The pediatrician who chooses to set up shop not in a wealthy suburb but in a poor inner city, the lawyer who goes to work as a prosecutor or for a non-profit? 

President Obama, a former community organizer, now wants to help parents choose colleges for their children on the basis of how much money the children might earn when they get out. To anyone whose college career involved courses in moral philosophy, or in art history, or literature, the idea of choosing a college on the basis of future earning potential has to seem narrow, at least. I'm not saying the job and earnings prospects of college graduates should be ignored by those considering enrolling, but it's only one factor among many, and not necessarily the most important. 

By all means, use the Internet and "big data" to bring more accountability and transparency to higher education. But a narrow focus on future earnings is misguided. This isn't necessarily a partisan issue. But the political party that tries to cater to "values voters" might consider what it is about a college education that's valuable other than "knowledge and skills for the jobs of the future." The answer may vary based on the individual or the family, which is why the college scorecards that really matter in the end won't be the ones prepared by President Obama's White House, but by students and their families.

NEXT: Gay Marriage Storyline Coming to DC Comics

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Obama State”
    Is that in the Big Ten?

    1. Soon the Big Fifty-Seven will created for all the State Universities created in honour of Dear Leader.

  2. What about the lifetime earnings of some of my Harvard classmates who have chosen to be stay-at-home moms?

    That’s an easy one to answer: they’re traitors to the Sisterhood.

    1. YaYa Sisterhood?

    2. They probably wouldn’t even be moms if you dog-eat-dog savages would have just paid for their birth control

  3. I’m sort of surprised they’re not ranked based on things like whether or not the campuses use green energy

    1. Greg| 2.20.13 @ 9:31PM |#
      “I’m sort of surprised they’re not ranked based on things like whether or not the campuses use green energy”

      Interesting.
      That would be the sort of worthless info the government would provide. Which would be the reason the parents and the students would shun the site.
      I don’t see any problem rating schools on ’employability’ or ‘salary’; if you’re dumb enough to presume those are specific outcomes, you shouldn’t be using a computer anyhow. Or a pencil and paper, for pete’s sake.

      1. Yeah I was also expecting to see a lot of stuff about diversity in there, so what they actually did (while still not all that useful) is way better than my expectation for the government

  4. my buddy’s aunt made $13007 last month. she been working on the laptop and moved in a $473900 house. All she did was get blessed and put into use the guide made clear on this web page http://www.WOW92.com

    1. 1. Place sex ad online
      2.
      3. Profit!

  5. oh good grief. This is a stupid article. I am a researcher who provides the data you see on the college scorecard to the department of education. ALL data is from IPEDS, the reporting system of the DOE. In fact each university on the scorecard has a link to IPEDS where you can search this data yourself. There is also a link to the transparency center where you can search out the highest and lowest charging institutions.

    This data is displayed as is, directly from the reports submitted by the institutions themselves while US News and other publications calculate rankings from the same data, the college scorecard does no such ranking. It is simply factual data. I was asked today to double check our data to verify the numbers. They are exactly the same as the numbers I submitted last year to the Department of Ed.

    At this time the DOE is not collecting data on earning of alums so this data is not readily available. At this time anyone can find data on earnings by career choice on the Bureau of Labor and Statistics. Once again public data.

    By the way, this is the exact same data that has been collected for years under a variety of left and right administrations. Nothing is different except for the fact that Obama is making this data easier to comprehend by the layperson. Previously this data was only really understood by researchers like me.

    Interested in seeing the source of the data?
    http://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/

    Same data but a bit more complicated to navigate.

  6. Get 24/7 Finance Homework Help from certified experts. Just Email your assignments, and let our tutors do the rest.

  7. On Demand Custom Essay Writing Service! Email your requirements and Get it done within given time frame.

    In context to this, we are here to provide some intensive and dedicated services to the students. We have a competent team of experts in different fields, who can guide students in writing good and rich academic essays. If you want to more information about My Custom Essay Writing Service then visit our website at http://www.mycustomessaywritingservice.com or contact us- buycoursework@gmail.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.