U.S. Higher Education: A Humble Rant

The higher education system here in the United States baffles me. What is the point? What did those who devised this system hope to achieve? Is this what “higher education” is about?

As you may have gathered if you’ve been reading my blog, I’m an American citizen by naturalization. I was born a British citizen, and was educated in the U.K. When I was at school before I emigrated to the colonies, this is how we did education.

The British Education System in My Day

When I started school I began in primary school. From age 5 through age 11, I was taught how to read and do basic arithmetic. I learned a bit about the world around me, dabbled in some elementary science and started a foreign language (French). Then I moved on to secondary school. Between the ages of 11 and 16 I built on that primary education.

The last two years of secondary school are where Brits select a number of subjects to study for examination. Mathematics and English were compulsory when I was at school, and you had to take a science and a modern language. Aside from those you could play to your strengths. Music, Economics, History, Japanese–whatever your school offered. At 16, you take nationally-set exams (O’ Levels in my day, OWLs at Hogwarts) on all of these subjects. On average you’d sit exams for 10-12 subjects.

At this point, British kids had (I use past tense because I don’t know if it’s still true today) the option to leave school with the nationally-recognized grades from their exams and look for work. Perhaps their chosen career path doesn’t require an academic education beyond this point. These youngsters may have aspirations to play professional sports, or build houses, or fix cars. Valid, useful, and often financially rewarding occupations for which you usually apprentice. In other words, you learn “on-the-job” not in the classroom.

The other option was to stay in school another two years and do “A-Levels.” You would take A-Levels if a) you were looking to go into a profession that required a bit more specialized knowledge, or b) you planned to go to university. Most kids studied 3 subjects at A-Level, usually subjects they enjoyed, were good at, or were required for their desired job or degree course. (Again I use the past tense because I’ve been out of the British system for thirty years.)

Those who wanted to pursue higher education (i.e., university) would spend time in their last year of A-Levels researching universities and coming up with a list of places they would like to attend as well as the subject they wanted to study. There was a “clearing house” our school used called UCCA. I don’t remember what the initials stood for, but you would complete a form listing your chosen subject and your top five universities. Teachers and career advisers would contribute comments to the form which would then be sent to UCCA. UCCA then shared this information with your chosen universities.

Universities then contacted prospective students to invite them for an interview, to tour the university, and meet some of the lecturers. If your academic record to date was particularly impressive, the university might go ahead and make you an offer, though most waited until after the interview. The offer would be along the lines of “We will accept you as a student if you get the following grades or better in your A-Level subjects.” Some universities were quite demanding (3 As, or 2As and a B). Others not so much, especially if they liked you in the interview and you had glowing recommendations from your teachers (1 B and 2 Cs). Usually a low-ball offer implied they know you’ll do well in your A-Level exams so they don’t need to set a high bar for you.

Then off you go to University. When I was at University, most degree courses ran for three years. During that time you studied the subject you listed on your UCCA form. Students could switch courses if they got buyer’s remorse, but that didn’t happen often. Most of the time the subject you went to study was the subject you studied the whole time. I went to University to study Theology. My first year consisted of set courses to give a foundation-level introduction to the field of study. So we dipped into Biblical studies, world religions, philosophy of religion, and concepts in theology. For the next two years we could choose topics of interest. I opted for Greek, Hebrew, church history, and New Testament studies (broadly speaking).

So for 21 years, I had in my head this model of education. You start of with a broad-based education that is serviceable and makes you employable and a useful member of society by the time you’re 16. Beyond that, you can start specializing, either through apprenticeships or a chosen career path, or through continuing your education within a particular field of study.

When I was a teenager, university wasn’t simply another step you were supposed to do after school. It was an option. In fact, I think only about 2-5% of kids went to university. Not because they couldn’t (for the most part), but because they didn’t want to or need to. And that was okay. There was no social stigma about not going to college. Your life goals were simply in a different direction.

And then I came to the U.S…

Higher Education in the U.S.

So here’s where I get a little ranty. Humbly, though, because if someone can justify why this is a good way to do higher education, I’m open to being corrected. But this is the U.S. system as I have come to understand it.

You start off much the same way the Brits do (or did from my experience). You start off in Kindergarten and progress through Middle School and High School getting a broad-based education in various fields of study. You are expected to stay in school until you’re 18. If you leave at 16 not having “graduated” you are considered a drop-out and good luck getting a job or doing anything worthwhile with your life. At 18 you graduate High School having sat some kind of standardized test (ACT, SAT, or the like), armed with a transcript of your High School grades. With these you go to college. At college, you study basically many of the same subjects you studied in High School (perhaps with “College” stuck on the front of the subject to make it sound different and special, e.g., “College Algebra”). Out of your four years at college, you spend half of that time doing “general education” and the other half studying your major.

Your major, should you choose one, is the subject you supposedly elected to study at college. This isn’t carved in stone however. You can change your major frequently, and many do. After all, this isn’t about studying a subject in-depth with a view to becoming expert in that field; it’s about getting a degree. Sure, there are a select few who have aspirations toward a particular discipline or a particular career. But most kids are at college to end up with a degree. Because that’s what you need to get a decent job.

Yeah, I’m starting to get ranty. Because this is what I don’t understand. What is the point of the U.S. College/University system? What are they hoping to achieve? Right now, as I see it, college is just an extension of High School. The exception being you get a diploma at the end that marks you out as a survivor and hence worthy of employment. And was it really worth spending a mortgage-worth of money for that? Seriously, how many kids go through the U.S. college system, funding the school’s athletics programs and professor tenure-ships, when they didn’t really need a college degree for the job they want to do?

I have known people in the U.S. who do not have college degrees yet are very bright and competent at their jobs. However, they are often denied promotions or pay advances because they lack that piece of paper.

Let me get personal for a moment. Yes, ranty AND personal. Take cover!

My oldest is currently in college. She’s an older student, and she’s my daughter, which means a) she’s actually at college to get an education, not for the “experience”; b) she’s there with a purpose; no-one told her to go, she decided it would be good for her chosen career; c) she actually knew what she wanted to do before she applied.

My daughter is also afflicted with her father’s lack of mathematical skill. For me, my arithmetical incompetence was something my teachers only had to endure until I eventually passed my O’Level. In fact, such was/is my incompetence, I re-took the exam 4 times. By the time I passed the O’Level had become the G.C.S.E. and I was 18. But I had my mathematics G.C.S.E. and I never had to take another math class ever again. After all, I was going to university to study Theology. Why would I need to keep studying math?

My poor beleaguered child has had to struggle through math this past semester not out of choice but because the system demanded it. She’s studying Theater FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! She had an amazing first year, did really well in her classes, and ended up with an impressive overall GPA. All that is hanging on a thread because of the time she’s had to put in to math. Not because Theater majors need math, or because she wanted to do math but because the system requires her to do math. Other classes, ones she actually enjoys, ones she’s good at, ones that actually matter for Theater majors, have suffered because of this math requirement.

IT MAKES NO SENSE!

The argument I hear the most is, “The general education requirement makes them into rounded students.” My question: “What was High School for, then?” I say, if you need general education at college to become a rounded student, HIGH SCHOOL FAILED YOU.

Think about this. You go to college in the States to study a subject. Out of four years you spend only two on that subject. In the UK you go to university to study a subject. Out of three years you spend THREE YEARS on that subject. Which students are more likely to come out of college knowing well their chosen field of study?

Don’t misunderstand me. I’m not putting down American students. There are many who go through the system and do well. There are many bright and capable people with degrees from American Universities. My contention is they succeed DESPITE the system. And they might actually do better if they could spend all their time in their chosen discipline and not have to waste time on courses that have no relevance to their major.

*phew*

I want to rant more about the whole “you need a degree to get a job” mindset, but I’ve ranted long enough for now. Another time, perhaps.

Thanks for letting me vent. If you want to defend the U.S. college system, feel free to in the comments. If you agree with me, also feel free to comment.