The author of this article asserts some of the recent complaints I’ve either personally heard from others or some of my own opinions regarding the costs of higher education.
Scott Galloway has recently become well known for additional criticism of higher education creating artificial constraints on admissions or acceptance of potential students.
Do you believe any of these points have merit?
Do you believe the current costs of higher education either in the US or other first world countries provides appropriate return on investment?
Do you believe the assertion that senior lecturers don’t have the same teaching skill requirements as primary education in addition to their subspecialty or focus?
How could higher education be improved or is the current model working well enough?
The solution is to either massively restrict federal/state scholarships (worse option) and let ineffective capialitalism kinda bring costs down or make single-payer college education available for all merited applicants.
The tuition cost bloat is the exact same issue as the healthcare cost bloat. To tell providers “you can charge whatever you want, we’ll make sure it gets paid one way or another,” (while also making it very difficult for communities to build their own independent facilities) is a surefire way to get price-fixing and regional monopolies. Dispite costs increasing several times over, the actual relevant staff of Healthcare facilities (doctors, nurses) and universities (professors, researcher) has remained pretty much unchanged over the past decades. The only areas that have seen staff increases are in administration - administration to manage administration. The reason for this? To justify the costs of rising service charges. The actual quality of services provided has been lapsed by those rises in cost.
Ha, right.