advancedleveljanuarybrief (1)

8/3/2019 AdvancedLevelJanuaryBrief (1)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/advancedleveljanuarybrief-1 1/124

Foundation BriefsAdvanced Level January Brief

Resolved: The costs of a college education outweigh the benefits.



January 2012 Table of Contents

foundationbriefs.com Page 1 of 123

Table of ContentsTable of Contents .................................................................................................................................................... 1

The New Foundation Brief ................................................................................................................................. 4

Key Organizational Changes .............................................................................................................................. 5

Hierarchical Sections ...................................................................................................................................... 5

Hierarchical Evidence ..................................................................................................................................... 5

Topic Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................ 6

Definitions............................................................................................................................................................... 7

Framework .............................................................................................................................................................. 8

Defend Your Source ............................................................................................................................................. 11

Author Index ..................................................................................................................................................... 12

Organization Index ........................................................................................................................................... 16

Laying the Foundation .......................................................................................................................................... 18

Important Data to Consider ........................................................................................................................... 20Pro Evidence ......................................................................................................................................................... 21

General .............................................................................................................................................................. 22

Rising Costs ...................................................................................................................................................... 23

Stagnating Income ............................................................................................................................................ 25

Money Can Be Better Invested ......................................................................................................................... 27

Other Job Prospects Better Suited for Some ..................................................................................................... 29

Too Many Grads End Up in Jobs Not Needing College Diploma.................................................................... 31

Debt Too Dangerous ......................................................................................................................................... 35

Unprepared Students Pushed into College........................................................................................................ 37

Chance of Dropout Too High ........................................................................................................................... 42

For-Profit Colleges Not Beneficial ................................................................................................................... 43

Much Education Does Not Occur in College ................................................................................................... 48





Quality of Education is Poor ............................................................................................................................. 49Some Students Not Suited—Waste of Money/Time ........................................................................................ 52

Negative Impact on Society and Economy ....................................................................................................... 53

Cost to Taxpayers ............................................................................................................................................. 54

Spending on Education Negatively Related to Economic Growth ................................................................... 56

State Investment in College has High Opportunity Cost .................................................................................. 57

Costs Limiting Access ...................................................................................................................................... 58

Con Evidence ........................................................................................................................................................ 59

General .............................................................................................................................................................. 60

Lower Unemployment ...................................................................................................................................... 63

Demand for College-Educated Employees is High and Rising ........................................................................ 65

Education Particularly Important During Recession ........................................................................................ 68

Degree Offers Protection in Poor Economy ..................................................................................................... 69

Knowledge Economy Necessitates Education .................................................................................................. 70

General Positive Impact on Earning and Wages .............................................................................................. 71

Impact on Quality of Life and Earnings ........................................................................................................... 72

Degree has Significant Positive Impact on Wages ........................................................................................... 76

Wage Premium Rising Faster than Cost ........................................................................................................... 81

College Degree is the Only Route to a Middle Class (or better) Job and Life ................................................. 82

Education Important for Subsequent Training .................................................................................................. 83

Working Uneducated Jobs Is Unsustainable .................................................................................................... 84

Technology Drives Demand for Education ...................................................................................................... 85

General Benefit to Society and Economy ......................................................................................................... 86Higher Tax Payments Benefit Society .............................................................................................................. 89

Lower Healthcare Costs Benefit Society .......................................................................................................... 94

Lower Welfare Costs Benefit Society .............................................................................................................. 96

High Societal Costs of Failing to Graduate ...................................................................................................... 98

Increased Civic Engagement .......................................................................................................................... 101





Education Provide High Return on Societal Investment through Productivity Increases .............................. 103Pro Counters........................................................................................................................................................ 104

Unemployment Similar Between College and ................................................................................................ 105

Non-College Educated Workers ..................................................................................................................... 105

Million Dollar Premium is Wrong .................................................................................................................. 106

Job Growth in Degree-Requiring Sectors is Low ........................................................................................... 108

Con Counters ...................................................................................................................................................... 109

Debt is a Good Investment .............................................................................................................................. 110

Remediated Students Succeed ........................................................................................................................ 111

Underutilized College Grads Better Off Than High School Graduates .......................................................... 112

Non-Traditional Jobs Benefit From College Education ................................................................................. 113

BLS Statistics Undervalue Degree ................................................................................................................. 114

Over-education is Exaggerated ....................................................................................................................... 116

Dangers of For-Profit Can Be Avoided .......................................................................................................... 117

Increasing Costs Justified ............................................................................................................................... 118

Contentions ......................................................................................................................................................... 119

Pro Contentions ............................................................................................................................................... 120

Con Contentions ............................................................................................................................................. 122



December 2011 The New Foundation Brief


The New Foundation Brief Here at Foundation Briefs, we came into the 2011-12 season determined to completely reimagine our

brief and make it even easier to use while introducing more content, better analysis and a broader scope. We

encourage you to read through the following pages carefully so that you know how everything is structured,

why evidence appears in the order it does, and even where to look for sections of analysis. We are always

looking to improve and cannot do so without your help and guidance. After all, you are the debater and we are

simply here to support you. So email us at [email protected] and let us know what you think—good or bad.

Redesigning the brief required the introduction of new and exciting sections. They are listed below with

a brief explanation of what is packed into each section and why we made the transition.

Topic AnalysisThis is a general reflection on the resolution. It will provide to you an impression of the topic at hand,

challenges you will face while debating, and a picture of where we see the debate headed.

FrameworkOften times, the most important part of the debate is to actually win before the debate begins. With this

section, we will set you up for such a feat. With unique analysis on how to lay the conditions for victory, you

will be guaranteed to begin battle already with an advantage.

Strategy SectionsFoundation Briefs is committed to making sure you understand the evidence provided to you. We will never

simply throw quotes at you and hope you can understand what we are trying to imply. That is where the

Strategy Section comes in. At the beginning of all major sections (i.e. the section in the brief regarding al-

Qaeda) there will appear a small section of original Foundation Briefs analysis to tell you how we see the

evidence being used, what rhetoric will please the judge and which counterarguments to be prepared for.

Defend Your SourceSometimes just telling a judge the source of your information doesn’t quite convey its validity. Having

debated countless rounds, we realize that there is nothing as credible as being able to tell the judge exactly who

the author is and what he or she does or why your judge should listen to the organization being quoted.

Foundation Briefs provides you with this information for each and every author and organization we quote

unless it is a source we know is credible and everyone has heard of (i.e the New York Times or CNN). Just look

for the red text below the source to tell you what to look up in the Defend Your Source Section.

mailto:[email protected]






December 2011 The New Foundation Brief


Key Organizational ChangesJust as we introduced a number of key sections to revolutionize our brief, we have done the same with

organizational features. They too are listed below so you know exactly how to find what you are looking for.

With the new Foundation Brief, there is no questioning how important a piece of evidence is or how we think it

should be used—every single piece of evidence is where it is for a reason. See below to understand our

reasons.

Hierarchical Sections

As with last season, all of the evidence in each Foundation Brief will be broken down into sections. The

most crucial arguments will come first. It is our intention that these sections will serve as excellent

foundations for contentions throughout the month. Although these sections were a feature of our briefs last

year, we have renewed our commitment to making sure that the most relevant sections come first.

Hierarchical Evidence

Arguably the most important change we made to our organization is that evidence is now organized

from most to least important. This means that if you only want the most crucial sources and the most relevant

ideas, you will see such evidence in the first few sources of each section. These essential sources of each section

are considered the Core Evidence Section, what you will want to include in your contentions. Following the

core will be the Supporting Evidence Section, which will give you greater understanding and further nuance to

the argument—don’t ignore this section! Evidence in this section is still very important; it just might not be

ideal to put in your time-constrained ~1 minute contentions. Finally, the Counter Evidence Section will come

at the end of the brief.

Important note: Webpages and online articles that are long and continuous will always be cited as page one (1)



December 2011 Definitions


Topic AnalysisThis month’s topic is a nice departure from the democratic debates surrounding the past months, and it is

also very relevant to high school debaters as they confront their futures. Indeed, as many debaters are very much

academically motivated many might not have questioned the value of college without this topic.

The topic itself is hugely challenging, and while interesting, seems as if it was quickly put together

without a lot of thought by the writers of resolutions. It is an incredibly broad and vague resolution. Of course,

every resolution we are confronted with has ground on both sides of the debate. The real truth to a resolution is“it depends” and that learning experience is one of the better parts about participating in debate. This resolution,

however, takes the “it depends” scenario to the extreme, so much so that the quality of the debate could be far

reduced. For example, the value of college is not at all the same for a budding athlete looking to become a

professional compared to an upper-middle class student who wants to be a doctor. It is also different for a

student who barely passed high school, lacks true motivation and will need to take on significant debt to get

through college than for a brilliant entrepreneur like Mark Zuckerberg. Teams will be able to easily create many

different scenarios on both sides where it will be glaringly obvious that the costs outweigh benefits or vice

versa. Thus, the risk is that teams will end up defending their invincible points and talking past one another,

unable to really engage in a debate.

It will be even more challenging for the judge. If each side proves college is/not worth it for 1-2 groups

of people, how is the judge to decide which group is more important? It will be your job as a debater to provide

coherent weighing mechanisms for the round.

The key is going to be flexibility, both sides will need to take a big picture approach to the debate and

look at the college experience as a whole for all parties involved. We will say, though, that there is

overwhelming evidence supporting the Con side in this debate—this resolution is possibly the most one-sided

resolution we have been confronted with so far this year. While it is true that many of the benefits to a college

education have been exaggerated, and that there are risks to investing in that education, for the hugely vast

majority of people a college education of some form or another is incredibly beneficial.

Luckily, you have this brief, which means we have tirelessly worked to erode the Con’s advantage

through extensive research to uncover some great points for the Pro side.

Good luck this month.



December 2011 Definitions


Definitions

Costs

For this resolution, costs should be considered in a relatively broad sense, encompassing everything from

monetary costs to costs that impact one’s quality of life. Additionally, it is worth noting that societal costs

will exist both in the monetary sense and, as Con could argue, in lower civic engagement or higher rates

of incarceration.

Merriam Webster: the outlay or expenditure (as of effort or sacrifice) made to achieve an object

College education

Merriam Webster: education beyond the secondary level (typically from some degree-granting institution).

Outweigh

The use of outweigh in this resolution implies some “on balance” argument in which neither side has to

prove that in every instance they are correct, just that the majority of the time and for the more

impactful instances they are correct in their argument.

Merriam Webster: to exceed in weight, value, or importance

Benefits

Much like costs, this is defined extremely broadly—something the below definition alludes to. Simply put,

there are many benefits (both to individuals and society) that can accrue from college. Be aware of this

regardless of which side of the resolution you are on.

Merriam Webster: something that promotes well-being



December 2011 Framework


FrameworkSimply delivering your contentions to the judge will not be enough to convince him or her, a true

champion debater is able to filter the resolution through a screen of insightful analysis. You must provide areasoning behind your arguments that goes beyond statistics, and makes the judge care about what you say.Often times, this takes the form of breaking down and analyzing the engine behind the resolution, finding outwhat the central propelling factor is that makes the debate relevant. Below we have constructed a few lenses toview the resolution. It is often best to include one of these as a quick observation before you begin yourcontentions. The goal is to provide the judge a greater depth of understanding to the round in a way that willgive you an advantage before the debate really begins. Then, you will weave this theme throughout.

Perspectives

As briefly mentioned in the Topic Analysis, and as you will see throughout the brief, the value and costs

of a college education vastly differ between individuals. There are two main perspectives you can take on to

better understand this resolution. The first is to become a prospective college student navigating his or her way

through the application process. This should be relatively easy for many debaters given that a lot of them are

doing just that right now. What are the implications of taking on such a persona? Most importantly, the debate

becomes a lot more hypothetical. We start to weight the options of different paths to college. For example, if

Pro has a contention about the dangers of for-profit colleges, the Con can claim that there are many options outthere that involve college education but not for-profit that the student can pursue. Additionally, rising costs are

ultimately the choice of the prospective student because he/she can choose a community college, or a state

institution over a private college (or that there are many scholarships available). Another nuance of this

perspective is that we are almost assuming the individual is qualified to go to college. The debate starts at,

"Well, I can go to college, but is it worth it?" This stands in contrast to the many students who are unprepared

but are misled or misdirected to pursue college anyway. This perspective most definitely suits the Con side

because many of the downsides of college can be explained away with the large number of options students can

take to choose the college that best suits their own financial/academic circumstances.

The other major perspective to take on this resolution is to become a researcher looking down on thenation as a whole and asking, "What is the state of college education?" As a dutiful researcher, the facts and

realities cannot be ignored. Yes, students do have the choice to avoid for-profit colleges, but many are misled

and end up saddled with debt and few job prospects. True, students do not have to major in non job oriented

fields of study that end up with less pay, but the reality is that the "college for all" mantra has pushed so many

students into college before they have any idea of a career that this is too often a real mistake. This perspective





is advantageous for the Pro side because debaters will need to confront all of the characteristics of collegeeducation and not just the good ones.

Finally, the resolution does not necessarily limit debate to individuals. Most of the debate will indeed

center on the costs and benefits for a single person going to college, but there are also larger impacts felt by

society. Taxpayers play a big role in college education, and the economy as a whole is influenced by the level of

education of workers. We have included some very interesting and relevant points on both sides dealing with

nation-wide impacts, do not disregard these.

Pro

First, do not allow Con to pick its own ground, i.e. say that students can choose the right school for

them. On the Pro side you will need to include as much ground as possible to bring in all of the various factors

that can go horribly wrong with a college education.

Before you begin the round, make sure to clearly outline the difference between correlation and

causation. Almost all of the studies about college find that college graduates earn more, are healthier, etc. But

none of them isolate education as the causal link to these benfits. Indeed, it seems very reasonable that the same

characteristics that get a student into college also enable them to excel in the workplace (critical thinking,

commitment, etc). So it is not a big leap to claim that if these college students passed up on college and went

right into the workplace, they would equally succeed. For example, those who attend college for 1-2 years andthen drop out still make more than those with only a high school diploma. This could show they are getting by

more on their natural abilities than on the limited education they received by going to school for a year. By

constantly questioning the evidence that Con presents, you can effectively cast doubt on their arguments with

relative ease. It will be very hard for them to legitimately claim their evidence accounts for these factors.

A final cautionary note: be consistent in your message. There are different lines of argumentation you

can take on the Pro side and mixing these are sometimes contradictory. For example, if you are going to argue

against for-profit colleges and their dangers you must also be careful if you want to claim that vocational

training/certification and licensing are viable alternatives to four year colleges because that type of training is

often provided by for-profit colleges.





ConThe Con side can narrow the debate to its advantage, because, considering all of the factors involved,

college always has a positive return on investment for the average student. Like any investment, there is risk

involved, and money spent is lost to some degree if one fails to graduate. However, study after study shows that

going to college will guarantee you earnings and higher employment rates. This is hard to argue with when you

interpret the resolution in a very literal sense. The costs of a college education in monetary terms is between

10,000-300,000 depending on the college and forgone wages, etc. But the extra wages earned far exceed this.

Focusing the debate into these very simple terms will make it clear to the judge that the Con side should win,

and then on top of that message you can add in intellectual and social benefits.

Are we assuming the person is qualified to go to college? What about kids who are not prepared but still pushed

into college?




Defend Your Source



December 2011 Author Index


Author Index

Robert Archibald

Robert Archibald is the chancellor professor of economics at William & Mary College. He focuses his research

on higher education

Richard Arum

Richard Arum is professor of sociology and education at New York University.

Sandy Baum

Sandy Baum is a professor emerita of economics at Skidmore College and senior policy analyst for the College

Board.

David Brooks

Mr. Brooks is a prestigious journalist writing for the New York Times and serves as a commentator for PBS.

Bryan Caplan

Bryan Caplan is an associate professor of economics at George Mason University.

Anthony Carnevale

Anthony P. Carnevale is the Director of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce.Between 1996 and 2006, Dr. Carnevale served as Vice-President for Public Leadership at the Educational

Testing Service (ETS). While at ETS, Dr. Carnevale was appointed by President George Bush to serve on theWhite House Commission on Technology and Adult Education. Before joining ETS, Dr. Carnevale wasDirector of Human Resource and Employment Studies at the Committee for Economic Development (CED),the nation's oldest business-sponsored policy research organization. While at CED, Dr. Carnevale wasappointed by President Clinton to Chair the National Commission on Employment Policy.





David H. FeldmanDavid H. Feldman is a professor of economics and public policy at the College of William and Mary in

Williamsburg, Va. Robert B. Archibald is chancellor professor of economics at the College of William and

Mary.

Dana Goldstein

From Wikipedia, “Dana Goldstein is a journalist, a Schwartz Fellow at the New America Foundation, and a

Puffin Fellow at The Nation Institute. She is a former associate editor at The Daily Beast and in 2010 won the

Spencer Fellowship in education journalism at Columbia University.”

Michael Greenstone

Michael Greenstone is the 3M Professor of Environmental Economics in the Department of Economics at the

Massachusetts Institute of Technology. From 2009-10 he served as the chief economist at the White House’s

Council of Economic Advisers.

David Leonhardt

David Leonhardt is a journalist for the New York Times. In 2003, he was part of a team of Times reporterswhose coverage of corporate scandals was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. He won the Gerald Loeb Award formagazine writing in 2009 for a New York Times Magazine article, "Obamanomics." He was a winner of theSociety of American Business Editors and Writers "Best in Business Journalism Contest" for his New York

Times column in 2009 and 2007. In 2010, he was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize in Commentary for hiseconomic columns. In 2011 he won the Pulitzer Prize in Commentary. In July 2011, Leonhardt was appointedas chief of the Washington bureau of The Times.

Adam Looney

Adam Looney is a senior fellow in Economic Studies and policy director of The Hamilton Project. His research

focuses on tax policy, labor economics, inequality and social policy. Previously, Looney was the senior

economist for public finance and tax policy with the President’s Council of Economic Advisers and has been an

economist at the Federal Reserve Board.





Michael MandelMichael Mandel is the Chief Economic Strategist at the Progressive Policy Institute and the founder of Visible

Economy LLC, a New York-based news and education company. Mandel is also president of South Mountain

Economics, a consulting company and a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School’s

Mack Center for Technological Innovation and formerly chief economist at BusinessWeek .

Charles Murray

Charles Murray is a political scientist and scholar at the American Enterprise Institute

Marty Nemko

Marty Nemko is a career counselor based in Oakland, Calif.

Josipa Roska

Josipa Roksa is Assistant Professor of Sociology, with a courtesy appointment in the Curry School of

Education. She received her B.A., summa cum laude, in Psychology from Mount Holyoke College, and Ph.D. in

Sociology from New York University (NYU).

Mark Schneider

Mark Schneider is a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and Vice President at the AmericanInstitutes for Research, based in Washington DC. Prior to joining AIR, he served as the U.S. Commissioner of Education Statistics from 2005-2008. He is also a Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Political Science at theState University of New York, Stony Brook.

Jacques Steinberg

Jacques Steinberg is an American journalist for The New York Times and a graduate of Dartmouth College. The

Education Writers Association honored Steinberg's reading series with its top award, the Fred M. Hechinger

Grand Prize for Distinguished Education Reporting, in 1998.





Andrew SumAndrew M. Sum is Professor of Economics and Director of the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern

University in Boston.

Richard Vedder

Richard Vedder is Distinguished Professor of Economics at Ohio University and a member of the Board of

Scholars at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a research and education institute headquartered in Midland,

Mich.

Marcus A. Winters

Marcus Winters is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute

Alison Wolf

Alison Wolf is a professor of public-sector management at King's College London

Jim WolfstonJim Wolfston is founder and president of CollegeNET, Inc., a leading developer of web-based technology for

online commerce, contact management, scheduling and space use optimization. Jim is a named inventor on 10

U.S. patents covering various innovations in web-based forms commerce.



December 2011 Organization Index


Organization Index

The Center for College Affordability and Productivity

Founded in 2006, The Center for College Affordability and Productivity (CCAP) is dedicated to researching the

rising costs and stagnant efficiency in higher education, with special emphasis on the United States. CCAP

seeks to facilitate a broader dialogue on the issues and problems facing the institutions of higher education with

the public, policy makers, and the higher education community.

The Council of Economic Advisers

The Council of Economic Advisers, an agency within the Executive Office of the President, is charged with

offering the President objective economic advice on the formulation of both domestic and international

economic policy. The Council bases its recommendations and analysis on economic research and empirical

evidence, using the best data available to support the President in setting our nation's economic policy.

Educational Policy Institute

Educational Policy Institute (EPI) is a non-profit organization founded by President and CEO Dr. Watson ScottSwail, and dedicated to increasing awareness of the challenges that individuals and families from under-served

communities face throughout their educational career.

EPI is based in Virginia Beach, Virginia, and partners with renowned research and educational organizations

around the world, with satellite offices in Winnipeg, Canada and Melbourne, Australia. The resources and

knowledge gained through these partnerships and collaborations enhance EPI’s ability to conduct high-level

research with global and local relevance and expertise.

The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce

From its website, “The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce (Center) is anindependent, nonprofit research and policy institute that studies the link between education, careerqualifications, and workforce demands. Specifically, the Center conducts research, engagement, and outreach topolicymakers and practitioners.”



December 2011 Organization Index


Harvard Graduate School of EducationThe GSE is self-described as, “Since its founding in 1920, the Ed School has been training leaders to transform

education in the United States and around the globe. Today, our faculty, students, and alumni are studying and

solving the most critical challenges facing education” The Harvard GSE is ranked 2nd in the nation for

university education programs.

The John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy

“The John William Pope Center for Higher Education Policy is a nonprofit institute dedicated to improving

higher education in North Carolina and the nation. Located in Raleigh, North Carolina, it has been anindependent 501(c)(3) organization since 2003. It is named for the late John William Pope, who served on theUNC-Chapel Hill Board of Trustees.” (From its website)

National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER)

From NBER's website, "Founded in 1920, the National Bureau of Economic Research is a private, nonprofit,

nonpartisan research organization dedicated to promoting a greater understanding of how the economy works.

The NBER is committed to undertaking and disseminating unbiased economic research among public

policymakers, business professionals, and the academic community." Also, "The NBER is the nation's leading

nonprofit economic research organization. Twenty Nobel Prize winners in Economics and thirteen past chairs ofthe President's Council of Economic Advisers have been researchers at the NBER. The more than 1,100

professors of economics and business now teaching at colleges and universities in North America who are

NBER researchers are the leading scholars in their fields

The New England Journal of Higher Education

Founded by The New England Board of Higher Education, “NEBHE was founded in 1955, when six visionaryNew England governors – realizing that the future prosperity of New England rested on higher education –committed their states to the shared pursuit of academic excellence. Soon thereafter, NEBHE was approved by

New England's six state legislatures and authorized by the U.S. Congress.” (From NEBHE website)



December 2011 Foundation


Laying the FoundationThis is a difficult resolution. See quotes below

"Are Too Many Students Going to College?" The Chronicle of Higher Education. 8 Nov. 2009. Web. 04

Dec. 2011. <http://chronicle.com/article/Are-Too-Many-Students-Going/49039/>.

In this article, the author asked education experts about the costs and benefits of college. Please see our

Defend Your Source section to get credentials on the various experts. Below are the best (most useful to

the debate) responses:

At what point does the cost of going to college outweigh the benefits?

Baum: That is a question that will have a different answer for different individuals. First, the benefits of

going to college are much broader and deeper than the financial return. If the question is how much is worth

spending, the answer depends on career goals and alternative options. But it is clear that at current college

prices, and considering existing financial aid, continuing their education after high school makes sense for most

people who are motivated to do so, even if that requires postponing a portion of the payment in the form of

loans.

Wolf: Not a question one can answer! Benefits are not just in earning terms. And it depends on the quality of

the education and what people get from it, how the economy develops, etc., etc. That is why it has to be anindividual decision.

Murray: It depends on how much money you have.

Good overview of the arguments (from source above):

Charles Murray: It has been empirically demonstrated that doing well (B average or better) in a traditional

college major in the arts and sciences requires levels of linguistic and logical/mathematical ability that only 10

to 15 percent of the nation's youth possess. That doesn't mean that only 10 to 15 percent should get more than a

high-school education. It does mean that the four-year residential program leading to a B.A. is the wrong model

for a large majority of young people. (1)

A large wage premium for having a bachelor's degree still exists. For everything except degrees in engineering

and the hard sciences, I submit that most of that premium is associated with the role of the B.A. as a job

requirement instead of anything that students with B.A.'s actually learn. The solution to that injustice—and it is

one of the most problematic social injustices in contemporary America—is to give students a way to show





employers what they know, not where they learned it and how long it took them. In other words, substitute

certifications for the bachelor's degree.

Marty Nemko: Students with weak academic records should be informed that, of freshmen at "four year"

colleges who graduated in the bottom 40 percent of their high-school class, two-thirds won't graduate even if

given eight and a half years. And that even if such students defy the odds, they will likely graduate with a low

GPA and a major in low demand by employers. A college should not admit a student it believes would more

wisely attend another institution or pursue a noncollege postsecondary option. Students' lives are at stake, not

just enrollment targets. (1)

Bryan Caplan: There are two ways to read this question. One is: "Who gets a good financial and/or personal

return from college?" My answer: people in the top 25 percent of academic ability who also have the work ethic

to actually finish college. The other way to read this is: "For whom is college attendance socially beneficial?"

My answer: no more than 5 percent of high-school graduates, because college is mostly what economists call a

"signaling game." Most college courses teach few useful job skills; their main function is to signal to employers

that students are smart, hard-working, and conformist. The upshot: Going to college is a lot like standing up at a

concert to see better. Selfishly speaking, it works, but from a social point of view, we shouldn't encourage it.

Richard Vedder: While it is true that areas with high proportions of college graduates tend to have higher

incomes and even higher rates of economic growth than other areas, it does not necessarily follow that

mindlessly increasing college enrollments enhances our economic well-being. My own research shows that

there generally is a negative relationship between state support for higher education and economic growth.

Sending marginal students to four-year degree programs, only to drop out, is a waste of human and financial

resources, and lowers the quality of life for those involved.

Markus Winters: Increasing college-attendance rates in the United States is essential to reducing income

inequality and maintaining our stature as a world economic leader. Our economic dominance in the second half

of the 20th century was directly related to our educational dominance. The United States was the first nation to

provide basic education to all people regardless of their income. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the

educated American worker was far more productive than his illiterate overseas cousin. That advantage made our

nation rich. However, while other nations eventually caught on and caught up, American educational outcomes

have stagnated since the late 1970s. We have lost our educational advantage.

Those who argue that the bachelor's degree has lost its luster in the labor market are ignoring empirical evidence

to the contrary. As of 2005, after accounting for the differences between those who go to college and those who

do not, the premium for a year of college education was about 13 to 14 percent of an individual's weekly wage.

Employers clearly still value the general knowledge and work ethic that a student acquires in college. It is

important to note that the benefits of attending college are found both across and within professions. Blue-collar

workers benefit nearly as much as white-collar workers from a year of college education. That is, going to





college makes you a better plumber than you would have been otherwise. Why? One reason might be that

college imparts nonacademic, social skills that can benefit blue-collar workers, who often must interact withcustomers and clients who are themselves college-educated.

Important Data to Consider

Data about return on investment for over 1,000 colleges:

http://www.payscale.com/education/average-cost-for-college-ROI

Data regarding incomes depending upon education level.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/people/P24_2009.xls

Hear a debate in action:

http://www.npr.org/2011/10/17/141434876/do-too-many-kids-go-to-college







Pro Evidence



January 2012 Pro: Rising Costs


GeneralPathways to Prosperity. Rep. Harvard Graduate School of Education, Feb. 2011. Web. 15

Dec. 2011.

Our current system places far too much emphasis on a single pathway to success: attending and graduating from

a four-year college after completing an academic program of study in high school. Yet as we’ve seen, only 30

percent of young adults successfully complete this preferred pathway, despite decades of efforts to raise the

numbers. And too many of them graduate from college without a clear conception of the career they want to

pursue, let alone a pathway for getting there.

It is long past time that we broaden the range of highquality pathways that we offer to our young people,

beginning in high school. The lessons from other countries strongly suggest that this might be the single most

promising strategy for greatly increasing the percentage of young adults who earn a post-secondary degree or

credential that prepares them to embark on a meaningful career. (24)





Rising Costs

Vedder, Richard, and Matthew Denhart. "Why Does College Cost so Much?" CNN. 2Dec. 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2011.

This year, according to the College Board, average published in-state tuition and fee plus room/board charges

exceed $17,000 at four-year public institutions, a 6% increase from only one year earlier. (1)

In 2009, spending by Americans for post-secondary education totaled $461 billion, an amount 42% greater thanin 2000, after accounting for inflation. This $461 billion is the equivalent of 3.3% of total U.S. gross domestic

product (GDP) and an amount greater than the total GDP of countries such as Sweden, Norway and Portugal.

(1)

Whereas private businesses cut prices for consumers and costs to themselves through efficiencies that increase

profits and incomes, universities lack those incentives.

Indeed, the typical successful university president views his or her key constituencies not to be the customer

(students and their parents who pay tuition charges or the granters of research funds), but rather others -- the

faculty, important alumni, key administrators, trustees and occasionally politicians. They please theseconstituencies by raising, and then spending, lots of money.

They effectively bribe powerful faculty with low teaching loads, hig salaries and good parking. They give the

alumni successful intercollegiate athletic programs that are expensive and usually financed off the backs of

students. They give trustees whatever they want, no matter how costly or eccentric. (1)

Like health care, prices are rising rapidly for higher education because of the predominant role of third-party

payments -- federal student loans and grants, state government support for institutions and students, private

philanthropic gifts and endowment income. College seniors who borrow to finance their education now

graduate with an average of $24,000 in debt, and student loan debt now tops credit card debt among

Americans. When some else is paying a lot of the bills, students are less sensitive to the price, thus allowing

the colleges to care less about keeping prices under control. And the nonprofit nature of institutions reduces

incentives for colleges and universities to be efficient. (1)





Plumer, Brad. "College Tuition Is out of Control." The Washington Post. 27 Oct. 2011.Web. 13 Dec. 2011.



January 2012 Pro: Stagnating Income


Stagnating IncomeCensky, Annalyn. "Rising College Costs Price out Middle Class." CNN . 13 June 2011.

Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

Tuition: In 1988, the average tuition and fees for a four-year public university rang in at about $2,800, adjustedfor inflation. By 2008, that number had climbed about 130% to roughly $6,500 a year -- and that doesn't includebooks or room and board.

Income: If incomes had kept up with surging college costs, the typical American would be earning $77,000 a

year. But in reality, it's nowhere near that.

In 2008 -- the latest data available -- the median income was $33,000. That means if you adjust for inflation,Americans in the middle actually earned $400 less than they did in 1988. (1)



January 2012 Pro: Stagnating Income


Mandel, Michael. "Earnings of Young College Grads vs College Costs." Businessweek. 12Sept. 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.



January 2012 Pro: Money Can Be Better Invested


Money Can Be Better InvestedWolfston, Jim. "Is Higher Education Worth the Money?" The Wall Street Journal . 6 July

2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

But with the cost of higher education skyrocketing, many families are beginning to question whether a college

degree is worth the price. The arithmetic is persuasive. At the stock market’s historical 9% annual return

(nominal return over the past 50 years), $100,000 not invested in a four-year college education would be

worth over $3 million in 40 years. That return would handsomely eclipse the nominal lifetime earnings

difference of $1 million often quoted for college vs. high school graduates. Put aside the fact that the four-year

degree is being slowly replaced by the five-year degree, which bumps the cost of higher education even higher.

(1)

Kaufman, Sarah. "Some Say Bypassing a Higher Education Is Smarter than Paying for aDegree." The Washington Post. 10 Sept. 2010. Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

[James] Altucher, president of Formula Capital, says he sees people making bad investment decisions all the

time -- and one of them is paying for college.

But, it turns out, his anti-college ideas stem from personal experience. After his first year at Cornell University,

Altucher says his parents lost money and couldn't afford tuition. So he paid his own way, working 60 hours aweek delivering pizza and tutoring, on top of his course load.

He left Cornell thousands of dollars in debt. He also left with a degree in computer science. But it took failing at

several investment schemes, losing large sums of money and then studying the stock market on his own --

analyzing Warren Buffett's decisions so closely he ended up writing a book about him -- for Altucher to learn

enough about the financial world to survive in it. He thinks he would have been better off getting the real-world

lessons earlier, rather than thrashing himself to pay for school and shouldering so much debt.

"There's a billion other things you could do with your money," Altucher says. One option: Invest the

money you'd spend on tuition in Treasury bills for your child's retirement. According to Altucher,$200,000 earning 5 percent a year over 50 years would amount to $2.8 million. (1-2)



January 2012 Pro: Money Can Be Better Invested


Hough, Jack. "DON'T GET THAT COLLEGE DEGREE!" New York Post. 28 June2009. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.Consider two childhood friends, Ernie and Bill. Hard workers with helpful families, each saves exactly $16,594

for college. Ernie doesn't get accepted to a school he likes. Instead, he starts work at 18 and invests his college

savings in a mutual fund that tracks the broad stock market. Throughout his life, he makes average yearly pay

for a high school graduate with no college, starting at $15,901 after taxes and peaking at $32,538. Each month,

he adds to his stock fund 5% of his after-tax income, close to the nation's current savings rate. It returns 8% a

year, typical for stock investors.

Bill has a typical college experience. He gets into a public college and after two years transfers to a private one.

He spends $49,286 on tuition and required fees, the average for such a track. I'm not counting room and board,since Bill must pay for his keep whether he goes to college or not. Bill gets average-size grants, adjusted for

average probabilities of receiving them, and so pays $34,044 for college. He leaves school with an average-size

student loan and a good interest rate: $17,450 at 5%. The $16,594 he has saved for college, you see, is precisely

enough to pay what his loans don't cover.

Bill will have higher pay than Ernie his whole life, starting at $23,505 after taxes and peaking at $56,808. Like

Ernie, he sets aside 5%. At that rate, it will take him 12 years to pay off his loan. Debt-free at 34, he starts

adding to the same index fund as Ernie, making bigger monthly contributions with his higher pay. But when the

two reunite at 65 for a retirement party, Ernie will have grown his savings to nearly $1.3 million. Bill will have

less than a third of that. (1)

• This is a very crucial argument the Pro can make, but it should probably not be used as a separate

contention. Instead, it can be woven into another argument or used as a counter when Con brings up

the increased earnings begot by a college education.

•

As multiple experts show above, investing money for a college education in the broad stock marketwould receive a greater return than a degree. College earnings estimates ranges from an extra

$200,000 to $1 million both these stock return estimates range from $1.3 to $3 million.

• When using this argument, also emphasize that student loans and forgoing wages on the college side

are like a losing return, whereas a person working out of high school gets wages, experience, and still

would have a positive portfolio from the stock market over 40 years.



January 2012 Pro: Other Job Prospects Better


Other Job Prospects Better Suited for SomeGoldstein, Dana. "Should All Kids Go to College?" The Nation. 15 June 2011. Web. 15

Dec. 2011.

the Harvard Graduate School of Education released a report called “Pathways to Prosperity.” The report noted

that of the 47 million American jobs expected to be created between now and 2018, about two-thirds will

require some sort of education beyond high school, yet a much smaller proportion will require a four-year

college degree. About 14 million of these new jobs will be in “mid-skill” occupations that require just a post-

secondary certificate or associate’s degree: jobs such as dental hygienist, construction manager and electrician.

Such occupations can provide a path into the middle class; indeed, 27 percent of workers with occupational

licenses earn more than the average recipient of a bachelor’s degree. (1)

Carnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs andEducation Requirements through 2018. Rep. Georgetown University Center onEducation and the Workforce, June 2010. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

43 percent of workers with licenses and certificates earn more than their colleagues with an Associate’s degree.

About 27 percent of workers with licenses and certificates earn more than employees with a Bachelor’s

degree, and 31 percent of those with Associate’s degrees earn more than their counterparts with a Bachelor’s

degree.

Licenses and certificates come about from more specific training and lead to professions like electrician

or dental hygienist. So we can see that a lot of people might be better off going into training for a career

that interests them rather than moving on to college without question and later dropping out or getting a

degree in something that is not in high demand.

PREPARING THE WORKERS OF TODAY FOR THE JOBS OF TOMORROW. Rep.EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT COUNCIL OF ECONOMICADVISERS, July 2009. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

The occupational demands of the future are expected to require skills obtained through post-secondary

education and training. Figure 6 shows that occupations requiring higher educational attainment are projected

(using the BLS forecasts) to grow much faster than those with lower education requirements. The categories

with some education required beyond high school are growing faster than those not requiring post-secondary

schooling. The growth is not solely among occupations requiring bachelor’s degrees; occupations that



January 2012 Pro: Other Job Prospects Better


require only and associate’s degree or a post-secondary vocational award are actually projected to growslightly faster than occupations requiring a bachelor’s degree or more. (11-12)

Pathways to Prosperity. Rep. Harvard Graduate School of Education, Feb. 2011. Web. 15Dec. 2011.

There will also be exceptionally rapid growth in such healthcare support jobs as nursing aide, home health aide

and attendant. Though such positions are still open to highschool graduates, they are increasingly filled by

people with some post-secondary education or a certificate. Similarly, over half of massage therapists and

dental assistants now have a post-secondary certificate.

There will also be a huge number of job openings in socalled blue-collar fields like construction, manufacturing

and natural resources, though many will simply replace retiring baby boomers. These fields will provide nearly

8 million job openings, 2.7 million of which will require a post-secondary credential. In commercial

construction, manufacturing, mining and installation, and repair, this kind of post-secondary education—as

opposed to a B.A.—is often the ticket to a well-paying and rewarding career. (3)

Steinberg, Jacques. "Plan B - Skip College." The New York Times. 15 May 2010. Web. 13Dec. 2011.

Professor Vedder, founder of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a research nonprofit inWashington. “But the numbers are still relatively small compared to the numbers of nurses’ aides we’re goingto need. We will need hundreds of thousands of them over the next decade.”

And much of their training, he added, might be feasible outside the college setting.

College degrees are simply not necessary for many jobs. Of the 30 jobs projected to grow at the fastest rate overthe next decade in the United States, only seven typically require a bachelor’s degree, according to the Bureauof Labor Statistics.

Among the top 10 growing job categories, two require college degrees: accounting (a bachelor’s) and

postsecondary teachers (a doctorate). But this growth is expected to be dwarfed by the need for registerednurses, home health aides, customer service representatives and store clerks. None of those jobs require abachelor’s degree. (1)

Professor Vedder likes to ask why 15 percent of mail carriers have bachelor’s degrees, according to a 1999

federal study.

“Some of them could have bought a house for what they spent on their education,” he said. (1)



January 2012 Pro: Grads Don’t Need Their Diploma


Too Many Grads End Up in Jobs Not Needing

College DiplomaRampbell, Catherine. "Many With New College Degree Find the Job Market Humbling."

The New York Times. 18 May 2011. Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

Employment rates for new college graduates have fallen sharply in the last two years, as have starting salaries

for those who can find work. What’s more, only half of the jobs landed by these new graduates even

require a college degree, reviving debates about whether higher education is “worth it” after all. (1)

Young graduates who majored in education and teaching or engineering were most likely to find a job requiring

a college degree, while area studies majors — those who majored in Latin American studies, for example —

and humanities majors were least likely to do so. Among all recent education graduates, 71.1 percent were in

jobs that required a college degree; of all area studies majors, the share was 44.7 percent. (1)

Sum, Andrew. Labor Underutilization Impacts of the Great Recession of 2007-2009:Variations in Labor Underutilization Problems Across Age, Gender, Race-Ethnic,Educational Attainment and Occupational Groups in the U.S., 2009 FourthQuarter. Rep. Center for Labor Market Studies, Northeastern University, Mar.2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Well educated, underemployed workers (recent BA graduates) often are mal-employed working in jobs that do

not require college degrees. Only 1 of every 2 bachelor degree holders under age 25 in 2009 was working in

a college labor market job. The mal-employed receive very low returns to their investment in a college

education. (2)

Vedder, Richard. "Why Did 17 Million Students Go to College?" The Chronicle of HigherEducation. 20 Oct. 2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Over 317,000 waiters and waitresses have college degrees (over 8,000 of them have doctoral or professional

degrees), along with over 80,000 bartenders, and over 18,000 parking lot attendants. All told, some 17,000,000

Americans with college degrees are doing jobs that the BLS says require less than the skill levels

associated with a bachelor’s degree. (1)





Matgouranis, Christopher. "The Underemployed College Graduate." The Center forCollege Affordability and Productivity. 18 Oct. 2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics keeps a superb data base of educational attainment levels by occupation,

publishing detailed attainment data for well over 700 professions. But what does this data show?

Overwhelmingly this dataset supports the anecdotal evidence that there are legions of underemployed college

graduates. The table below highlights just a few of the examples, showing the percentage of workers in a given

profession who possess at least a bachelor's degree.

ProfessionProportion with a College

Degree

Flight attendants 29.8%

Retail salespersons 24.5%

Customer service representatives 21.6%

Baggage porters and bellhops 17.4%

Secretaries (not legal/medical/executive) 16.6%

Hotel, motel, and resort desk clerks 16.1%

Telemarketers 15.8%

Taxi drivers and chauffeurs 15.2%

Manicurists and pedicurists 11.5%

Shampooers 11.5%

Locksmiths and safe repairers 10.2%

Telecomm. installers & repairers 13.1%





Ponnuru, Ramesh. "The Case Against College Education." TIME Magazine. 24 Feb.2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

It has been estimated that, in 2007, most people in their 20s who had college degrees were not in jobs that

required them: another sign that we are pushing kids into college who will not get much out of it but debt. (1)

"The Real Education Crisis: Are 35% of All College Degrees in New England Unnecessary?"The New

England Journal of Higher Education. 30 Nov. 2010. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

“Over-education" and “malemployment” are rampant in every one of the New England states:

• Connecticut has 248,062 unnecessary degrees;

• Maine has 79,738 unnecessary degrees;

• Massachusetts has 531,669 unnecessary degrees;

• New Hampshire has 119,705 unnecessary degrees;

• Rhode Island has 70,904 unnecessary degrees; and

• Vermont has 51,026 unnecessary degrees.

Vedder, Richard, and Matthew Denhart. "Why Does College Cost so Much?" CNN. 2

Dec. 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2011.

Nondegree forms of education need more emphasis, since the number of college graduates exceeds the number

of jobs available in occupations for which degrees historically have been desirable -- jobs in the managerial,

technical and professional areas. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2008 some 29.7% of

flight attendants, 24.4% of retail salespersons and 17.4% of baggage porters had a bachelor's degree or higher.

According to my analysis of the data, more than 17 million college graduates were "underemployed" in 2008.

Surely these people needed some form of post high school training, but an expensive four-year degree may not

have been the best approach. Rather, perhaps we should be encouraging some students to develop skills at

lower costs by utilizing innovative free courses provided by groups such as the Saylor Foundation and Khan

Academy. (1)





• The previous two sections will be summed up and strategized here.

• One main takeaway from these sections is that often new jobs are emerging in a modern economy

which can out-earn college grads. Additionally, too many people go to college and do not receive an

adequate education and therefore end up working a job that does not require a college degree.

• This is a very convincing argument as a contention when used in tandem with other argumentspresented in the brief. The key is to first set up a picture of many students going to college because

that’s what is expected of them; they wander from course to course with no real purpose and take on

a large debt. Then, when they go into the work world many cannot find a proper job and end up in a

job that does not require a college degree. The end result is debt, years of working experience and

wages lost, and then you really push the point that there are better alternatives that pay well and do

not need a college degree.

• This argument operates under the framework of looking at the entire picture of college education.

You are not trying to deny that those who are very motivated, focused and well-resourced should go

to college. You are instead arguing that these types of people are in the vast minority and that most

people are better suited to other types of training and career objectives.



January 2012 Pro: Debt Too Dangerous


Debt Too DangerousLewin, Tamar. "Burden of College Loans on Graduates Grows." The New York Times.

11 Apr. 2011. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

Student loan debt outpaced credit card debt for the first time last year and is likely to top a trillion dollars this

year as more students go to college and a growing share borrow money to do so. (1)

Two-thirds of bachelor’s degree recipients graduated with debt in 2008, compared with less than half in 1993.

Last year, graduates who took out loans left college with an average of $24,000 in debt. Default rates are rising

especially among those who attended for-profit colleges. (1)

The mountain of debt is likely to grow more quickly with the coming round of budget-slashing. Pell grants for

low-income students are expected to be cut and tuition at public universities will probabl increase as states with

pinched budgets cut back on the money they give to colleges. (1)

Deanne Loonin, a lawyer at the National Consumer Law Center, said education debt was not good debt for the

low-income borrowers she works with, most of whom are in default.

Unlike most other debt, student loans generally cannot be discharged in bankruptcy, and the government can

garnish wages or take tax refunds or Social Security payments to recover the money owed. (1)

Censky, Annalyn. "Rising College Costs Price out Middle Class." CNN . 13 June 2011.Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

Meanwhile, the amount of federal aid available to individual students has also failed to keep up. Since 1992, the

maximum available through government-subsidized student loans has remained at $23,000 for a four-year

degree.

"There does seem to be this growing disparity between income and the cost of higher education," said Justin

Draeger, president of the National Association of Student Financial Aid Administrators. "At the same time,

there's been a fundamental shift, moving away from public subsidization, to individuals bearing more of the

cost of higher education."

Facing that disparity, it's no wonder then that two other trends have emerged: Families are taking on

unprecedented levels of debt or downgrading their child's education from a four-year, to a two-year, degree to

cut costs. (1)



January 2012 Pro: Debt Too Dangerous


About two thirds of students graduating with four-year degrees recently did so with loans hanging over theirheads, and their average bill comes in at a whopping $23,186, according to FinAid.org.

Of those, Kantrowitz estimates that about half will still be repaying their loans in 20 years -- the traditional

student loan period. And for many, that may very well mean they won't be able to buy a home, save for

retirement or fund the next generation's education.

"They could still be paying back their own student loans, when their children are in college," he said (1)

Hacker, Andrew, and Claudia Dreifus. "The Debt Crisis at American Colleges." The

Atlantic. 17 Aug. 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

As this semester begins, college loans are nearing the $1 trillion mark, more than what all households owe on

their credit cards. Fully two-thirds of our undergraduates have gone into debt, many from middle class families,

who in the past paid for much of college from savings. The College Board likes to say that the average debt is

"only" $27,650. What the Board doesn't say is that when personal circumstances go wrong, as can happen in a

recession, interest, late payment penalties, and other charges can bring the tab up to $100,000. Those going on

to graduate school, as upwards of half will, can end up facing twice that. (1)

With mortgage defaults, banks seize and resell the home. But if a degree can't be sold, that doesn't deter the

banks. They essentially wrote the student loan law, in which the fine-print says they aren't "dischargable." So

even if you file for bankruptcy, the payments continue due. Hence these stern word from Barmak Nassirian of the American Association of College Registrars and Admissions Officers. "You will be hounded for life," he

warns. "They will garnish your wages. They will intercept your tax refunds. You become ineligible for federal

employment." He adds that any professional license can be revoked and Social Security checks docked when

you retire. We can't think of any other statute with such sadistic provisions. (1)



January 2012 Pro: Students Unprepared for College


Unprepared Students Pushed into CollegeHacker, Holly. "Students Playing Catch-up as They Hit College." The Dallas Morning

News. 21 Mar. 2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Each year, tens of thousands of Texas students land in this academic purgatory - no longer in high school but

not ready for college. About 40 percent of recent high school graduates in the state's public universities and

colleges need at least one remedial class.

Statistics show those students take longer to earn a college degree, if they do at all.

The job of remediation falls mainly to community colleges, which open their doors to all students. Texas

taxpayers will spend more than $80 million this year to subsidize remedial classes that don't carry college

credit. (1)

Not all remedial college students make it to college-level work. In Texas, only 38 percent of community college

students who need remediation either graduate or are still in school after three years, vs. 57 percent of college-

ready students. (1)

"Alabama Remedial Education: One-Third of Students Unprepared for College." The

Huffington Post. 13 July 2011. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

According to the latest numbers collected by the Alabama Commission on Higher Education (ACHE), 34.4

percent of students enrolled in a two- or four-year college program in 2010 required at least one remedial course

in math or reading (1)

According to the 2008 study “Diploma to Nowhere” by the nonprofit Strong American Schools, remedial

education in public universities costs the federal government between $2.31 and $2.89 billion annually. In

reality, the cost is even higher, as students are essentially taking classes over again. In Alabama alone, remedial

education costs the state economy $51 million directly, and an additional $29 million in lost income. (1)

nearly 80 percent of the students surveyed believed they were ready for college when they left high school, and

four out of five in remedial education had a high school GPA of 3.0. (1)

Jerome Cook, principal of Bessemer City High School told the Birmingham News: “I don't think it's fair that

some of these kids are leaving with As and Bs and then go into college and have to take remedial courses. I





think they've dumbed down the curriculum trying to make sure students have good GPAs and test scores, andit's hurting these kids in the long run.” (1)

Riede, Paul. "Report: Only 37 Percent of New York High School Freshmen BecomeCollege- and Career-ready within Four Years." The Syracuse Post-Standard. 15June 2011. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

The state Education Department released a report Tuesday that showed high school graduation rates inching up

across New York…But the statewide “college- and career-ready” rate for the same cohort of students was only

37 percent. (1)

The Regents point to research that found that 44 percent of New York high school graduates who attend two-

year colleges for the first time need remedial help. Thirteen percent of those who enter four-year colleges need

extra help. (1)

Hammon, Besty. "Most Oregon High School Grads Unprepared for College, Half WouldFail Freshman College Math, Report Says." The Oregonian. 15 Aug. 2011. Web. 15Dec. 2011.

Nearly three-fourths of college-bound graduates of Oregon high schools are unprepared for college, primarily

because of weaknesses in math and science, a report out today warns.

The report is based on the ACT test scores of nearly 12,000 students, or 35 percent, from Oregon's high school

class of 2011.

Results indicate that college-readiness levels are stagnant among the state's college-bound students. That's true

despite a proliferation of high school calculus courses and the state's recent drive to offer more Advanced

Placement math and science.

Fully half of the Oregon students who took the national college-entrance exam are unprepared to pass freshman

college math, and two-thirds are unprepared for college science, ACT Inc., nonprofit maker of the ACT test,

reported. (1)





Wolfgang, Ben. "Scores Show Students Aren’t Ready for College." The WashingtonTimes. 17 Aug. 2011. Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

Three out of four graduates aren’t fully prepared for college and likely need to take at least one remedial class,

according to the latest annual survey from the nonprofit testing organization ACT, which measured half of the

nation’s high school seniors in English, math, reading and science proficiency.

Only 25 percent cleared all of ACT’s college preparedness benchmarks, while 75 percent likely will spend part

of their freshman year brushing up on high-school-level course work. The 2011 class is best prepared for

college-level English courses, with 73 percent clearing the bar in that subject. Students are most likely to need

remedial classes in science and math, the report says. (1)

While often frustrating for professors who are forced to spend a semester teaching concepts their students

should have learned by the end of 12th grade, remedial classes also carry more serious consequences.

Students are much more likely to drop out of college if they feel that they are simply repeating high

school, said Bob Wise, former West Virginia governor and president of the Alliance for Excellent Education, a

Washington-based advocacy group.

Taxpayers also suffer, Mr. Wise said, by “paying twice” for students to take high-school-level classes again,

since most remedial work doesn’t count toward college graduation.

In the 2007-08 academic year, the alliance estimates, remedial courses cost about $5.6 billion — $3.6 billion in

“direct educational costs” such as taxpayer contributions to state universities and another $2 billion in lost

wages, a result of giving up on higher education and missing out on the bigger paychecks that tend to come with

college degrees. (1)

Bailey, Melissa. "Report: City Students Not Ready For College." New HavenIndependent. 16 Nov. 2011. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

“Startling” new data shows 89 percent of New Haven Public School graduates need to catch up in English and

math before they can start earning credits at Connecticut public colleges and universities. (1)

Statewide, 73 percent of Connecticut public high school graduates at state community colleges are

recommended for “developmental” English or math classes, according to a “toolkit” the council put together.

“Developmental” means “courses that carry no college credit and are designed to improve students’ basic skills

so that they can be successful in courses that carry college credit.”





At Connecticut state universities, the remediation rate is slightly better: 66 percent of public school grads enrollin remedial or developmental English or math freshman year. In the state university system, “remedial” courses

carry no college credit and are “designed to improve students’ basic skills.” (1)

At New Haven’s local university, Southern Connecticut State University, the remediation rate was a whopping

92.8 percent.

At Gateway Community College, it was 85.6 percent.

Those figures are based on students who enrolled in state universities or college students immediately after

graduating from public Connecticut high schools in the spring of 2010.

Remediation rates matter in part because they’re a predictor of success: “Students who need to take even

one developmental course in college are less likely to earn a degree than their counterparts who do not

need remediation,” according to P-20’s report.

Betinger, Eric, and Bridget Long. ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF UNDER-PREPAREDSTUDENTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION: DOES COLLEGE REMEDIATIONWORK? Rep. NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, May 2005.Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

In some cases, academic deficiencies are so severe that colleges choose to expel the students. For instance,

during the fall of 2001, the California State University system “kicked out more than 2,200 students – nearly 7

percent of the freshman class – for failing to master basic English and math skills” (3)

by increasing the number of requirements and extending the time to degree, remediation may negatively impact

student outcomes such as persistence, major choice, and eventual labor market returns. Moreover, the cost of

remediation is significant. In Ohio, public colleges spent approximately $15 million teaching 260,000 credit

hours of high school-level courses to freshmen in 2000; another $8.4 million was spent on older students. In

addition, the 20,000 freshmen in the courses paid $15 million in tuition for their remediation as well as used

financial aid resources and sacrificed foregone wages. (3-4)





Schemo, Diana Jean. "At 2-Year Colleges, Students Eager but Unready." The New YorkTimes. 2 Sept. 2006. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Though higher education is now a near-universal aspiration, researchers suggest that close to half the students

who enter college need remedial courses…The efforts, educators say, have not cut back on the thousands of

students who lack basic skills. Instead, the colleges have clustered those students in community colleges, where

their chances of succeeding are low and where taxpayers pay a second time to bring them up to college level.

The phenomenon has educators struggling with fundamental questions about access to education, standards and

equal opportunity.Michael W. Kirst, a Stanford professor who was a co-author of a report on the gap betweenaspirations and college attainment, said that 73 percent of students entering community colleges hoped to earnfour-year degrees, but that only 22 percent had done so after six years. “You can get into school,” ProfessorKirst said. “That’s not a problem. But you can’t succeed.’’

Nearly half the 14.7 million undergraduates at two- and four-year institutions never receive degrees.

Of course, the fact that these students are taking the classes they needed in the first place is a good thing.

They are building a foundation of knowledge. However, the argument that the Pro needs to make is that

these students are too often shoved into college by a society that emphasizes a diploma at all costs—the

result is that unprepared students take on debt to move forward in the educational system and then drop out

because they do not have the level of knowledge required to succeed. We see some evidence on the “culture

of college” in the statistic that 80% of high school grads think they’re ready for college. It’s an atmosphere

that is dangerous and pushed kids in the wrong direction. The end result is debt and no degree; this is

certainly not worth it.

This isn’t to say that colleges are at fault for these students being unprepared and at a high-risk for dropping

out. Indeed, it is a comment on our K-12 education system. But it is still highly relevant to the debate. We

are talking about the reality of the situation here, and Pro must emphasize that we have to deal with every

student looking at the possibility of college, not just those who come from elite prep schools and wealthy

families.



January 2012 Pro: High Dropout Rate


Chance of Dropout Too HighSteinberg, Jacques. "Plan B - Skip College." The New York Times. 15 May 2010. Web. 13

Dec. 2011.

no more than half of those who began a four-year bachelor’s degree program in the fall of 2006 will get that

degree within six years, according to the latest projections from the Department of Education. (1)

Ponnuru, Ramesh. "The Case Against College Education." TIME Magazine. 24 Feb.2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Our high college drop-out rate — 40% of kids who enroll in college don't get a degree within six years — may

be a sign that we're trying to push too many people who aren't suited for college to enroll. (1)

Goldstein, Dana. "Should All Kids Go to College?" The Nation. 15 June 2011. Web. 15Dec. 2011.

Just 53 percent of students who enter four-year colleges graduate within six years. At two-year communitycolleges, halfwithin three years.

One fifth of all students who borrow to pay for college drop out, and nearly one in five who drop out leave onlyafter accumulating $20,000 in debt. (1)


Only 56 percent of those enrolling in a four-year college attain a bachelor’s degree after six years, and less than

30 percent of those who enroll in community college succeed in obtaining an associate’s degree within three

years. (6)

In short, the majority of students who go on to college fail to earn a degree on time, and many of those never

successfully complete their degree. As a result, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and

Development, the United States now has the highest college dropout rate in the industrialized world. (10)

Given these dismal attainment numbers, a narrowly defined “college for all” goal—one that does not include a

much stronger focus on career-oriented programs that lead to occupational credentials—seems doomed to fail.

(8)



January 2012 Pro: For-Profit College Dangerous


For-Profit Colleges Not BeneficialLewin, Tamar. "Burden of College Loans on Graduates Grows." The New York Times.

11 Apr. 2011. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

Students who borrow to attend for-profit colleges are especially likely to default. They make up about 12

percent of those enrolled in higher education, but almost half of those defaulting on student loans. According to

the Department of Education, about a quarter of students at for-profit institutions defaulted on their student

loans within three years of starting to repay them.

“About two-thirds of the people I see attended for-profits; most did not complete their program; and no one I

have worked with has ever gotten a job in the field they were supposedly trained for,” Ms. Loonin said.

“For them, the negative mark on their credit report is the No. 1 barrier to moving ahead in their lives,” she

added. “It doesn’t just delay their ability to buy a house, it gets in the way of their employment prospects, their

finding an apartment, almost anything they try to do.” (1)

"Cracking down on For-profit Colleges." The Week Magazine. 16 Sept. 2011. Web. 15Dec. 2011. <http://theweek.com/article/index/219247/cracking-down-on-for-profit-colleges>.

Who attends for-profit colleges?

Almost 2 million Americans who want college degrees but can't get them at conventional schools. For-

profits such as the University of Phoenix, Kaplan University, and DeVry University target this market by

offering degrees that can be obtained online or at night classes in convenient locations. … Their students are

largely adults already working in low-paid jobs, veterans, and others who can't get admitted to, or commit the

time to, conventional colleges. Blacks and Hispanics make up nearly half of enrollees at for-profits. Harry

Alford, the head of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, credits for-profit colleges with "stepping up to

the plate and taking on the daunting task of educating 'high-risk' students." Over the last decade, the for-

profits have boomed: There are now 2,000 such colleges, currently enrolling 12 percent of all students in

higher education — up from 3 percent a decade ago. (1)

Do these colleges deliver on their promises?

No, says a growing group of critics, including educators, former students, and the federal Department of

Education. They say the schools provide dubious coursework and degrees that don't lead to good jobs, but do

leave students with crushing debt. Most students never complete their degrees. The University of Phoenix, for

example, is the industry leader, yet it graduates less than 9 percent of its bachelor's degree candidates





within six years. Schools have been accused of misleading applicants about loan costs, exaggerating potentialpost-graduation salaries, and targeting disabled veterans and homeless people to boost enrollment. Former

students of for-profit colleges now account for about half of all student-loan defaults. "I don't think I

learned anything at the Art Institute [of Philadelphia], other than how to get scammed by somebody," said

Taryn Zychal, who accumulated $150,000 in loans, only to find that no other institution would recognize her

academic credits. Legions of other students tell similar stories.

For-profit students pay an average of $31,000 a year for four-year degrees — almost double the average cost of

public universities. The country's largest for-profit college company, the Apollo Group, which owns the

University of Phoenix, has nearly 400,000 students and revenues of $4.9 billion. In 2009, the CEO of Strayer, a

chain of for-profits with more than 60,000 students, took home nearly $42 million; that year, the president of Harvard made less than $700,000. (1)

Who pays the colleges' tuitions?

Mostly the taxpayers. For-profit colleges receive an average of three quarters of their revenue from federal

grants and loans. "Some for-profit schools are efficient government-subsidy collectors first and educational

institutions second," a recent congressional committee report said. Critics of the industry say recruiters target

poor and minority students precisely because such students can tap the deep well of federal aid money. In 2000,

$4.6 billion in federal college loans and grants flowed to for-profit colleges; last year they received more than

$26 billion. A quarter of all federal student-loan money — and almost a third of Pell Grants, which are

earmarked for low-income students — now goes to for-profit institutions. "Millions of low-income students areborrowing heavily to attend for-profit colleges," Education Secretary Arne Duncan said, "and too many of them

are dropping out, failing to get a job, and leaving taxpayers with the bill." (1)

Last month, the Department of Justice and four states filed suit against Education Management Corporation, the

country's second-largest for-profit college company, charging that it fraudulently collected $11 billion in federal

aid, and illegally based recruiters' pay on how many students they enrolled. (1)

In 2005, California-based Bridgepoint Education bought Franciscan University of the Prairies, a failing

religious college with 332 students in Clinton, Iowa. Six years later, the school, renamed Ashford University,

has been transformed into one of the biggest online colleges in the country, with 78,000 students. Bridgepoint

posted $216 million in profits last year, while collecting nearly 87 percent of its revenue from federal aid. Sen.

Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) says the college is "an absolute scam" that has enriched Bridgepoint while providing

students with little of value. Harkin's committee found that 84 percent of students enrolled in two-year degree

programs at Ashford in 2008 had dropped out by 2010, and that the school employed more than 1,700 student

recruiters but just one job-placement specialist. "In the world of for-profit higher education," Harkin said,

"spectacular business success is possible despite an equally spectacular record of student failure." (1)





Hechinger, John. "For-Profit Colleges Violated Rules on Cheating, GAO Says."Businessweek. 29 Nov. 2011. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Seven out of 12 for-profit colleges attended online by undercover U.S. investigators violated school policies on

cheating, grading standards and loan counseling, a report by the Government Accountability Office found.

One or more instructors at two colleges repeatedly noted that the students were submitting plagiarized work, yet

took no action, according to the agency, Congress’s investigative arm. One student submitted photos of

celebrities and political figures to reply to an essay question and earned a passing grade, the agency said. (1)

Perez, Erica. "With Low Job Placement Rates, For-profit Colleges Risk LosingAccreditation." California Watch/Center for Investigative Reporting. 18 Nov. 2011.Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

New figures show two California campuses owned by for-profit education firm Career Education Corp. appearto have placed fewer than 65 percent of graduates in jobs – the minimum job placement rate required by theAccrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools.

And while Career Education officials disclosed earlier this month that job placement rates at 36 of 49 healtheducation and art and design schools had fallen below the minimum required by the accrediting agency, the newdata show that as many as 45 of the campuses may have missed the mark.

At the International Academy of Design & Technology in Sacramento, for example, an estimated 39 percent of students who graduated between July 2010 and June 2011 got jobs in a related field. (1)

Although students in the fashion design and marketing associate's degree program paid about $17,000 peryear in tuition and fees, the new data shows fewer than 1 in 5 graduates of that program actually got jobs in thefield.

Career Education officials disclosed earlier this month that an independent investigation by outside counselfound that most of its health and art and design campuses had inflated the 2010-11 job placement rates that wereabout to be reported to accreditors. The investigation was prompted by a subpoena from the New York attorney

general’s office. (1)





Senator Tom Harkin. The Return on the Federal Investment in For-Profit Education:Debt Without a Diploma September 30,. Rep. The United States Senate, 30 Sept.2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

In total, out of 16 for-profit schools analyzed, 57 percent of students who entered school between July 2008 and

June 2009 have withdrawn.

Over a three year period, an estimated 1.9 million students have left the 16 for-profit schools, most with nothing

to show for their time in a for-profit school but student loan debt. (1)

More than 95 percent of students at two-year for-profit schools and 93 percent at four-year for-profit schoolstook out student loans in 2007, while only 16.6 percent of students attending community colleges and 44.3

percent at public four-year institutions borrowed during the same period. (1)

According to a 2005 report published by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, students

who drop out without completing their degree were ten times more likely to default on their student loans,

which may foreclose the opportunity to earn their diploma at another school. (2)

The harsh reality for students attending for-profit colleges is that even a brief enrollment can result in

significant debt. The high rate of borrowing by students attending for-profit schools is due in part to higher

tuition rates. According to GAO’s August 4th testimony at a hearing of the HELP Committee, of the 15 schools

investigated, 14 had higher tuition than the nearest public college offering a similar program. One particular for-

profit college offered a “computer-aided drafting certificate” for $13,945, when the same program at a

community college would cost $520. The cost of an associates degree offered by the second largest for-profit is

over $38,000, and a bachelors degree from the same school can cost up to $96,500. Thus, a student who enrolls

in a for-profit school even for a short period of time can amass many thousands of dollars of debt that can take

years to repay.

To estimate the student loan burdens of students withdrawing from these institutions this analysis looked at how

long they remained enrolled. Among students who withdrew from the 16 schools, median attendance was

approximately 20 weeks. If that student attended full-time and took 12 credits per term he or she could still

incur a substantial debt. For the five schools in the chart above, a student attending for 15 to 22 weeks could

incur a tuition debt from $8,800 and $11,300. (7)





• The for-profit college argument is very strong on the Pro side simply because it is the most clear-cut.

• Many for-profit colleges use backwards and predatory actions to ensnare minorities and veterans, and

then suck money from the government and force these students to take out loans. Often, the cost of a

for-profit college is greater than a normal college but the quality of education is far, far worse.• When looking at this argument, be sure to understand what perspective you are taking on the

resolution. If you are taking the student perspective, then for-profit colleges probably do not have a

big impact on the debate because one can simply avoid them for better community or four-year

colleges. However, if you are taking on the researcher perspective, then for-profit colleges are a big

deal because so many people are misled and do end up falling into the trap.



January 2012 Pro: Education Not in College


Much Education Does Not Occur in CollegeCarnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education

Requirements through 2018. Rep. Georgetown University Center on Education and the

Workforce, June 2010. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

<http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/FullReport.pdf>.

One key to understanding this issue is an appreciation of the overall landscape of postsecondary education and

training. College is only one piece of the puzzle. In fact, colleges and universities represent only 35 percent of

the entire postsecondary education and training system. The rest consists of on-the job training, formal

employer-provided education programs, military training, apprenticeships, and a variety of other programs. (Pg.

1)

Vedder, Richard. "Higher Education and Economic Development." Mackinac Center. 19Jan. 2007. Web. 04 Dec. 2011. <http://www.mackinac.org/8175>.Please see Richard Veddder in the Author Index for more information

Much of the higher productivity of college graduates results not from what they learn in college, but from

personal attributes that would make them better workers than high school graduates in any case, regardless of

their education. Attributes like greater work discipline, higher innate intelligence, great conscientiousness, and

so forth.



January 2012 Pro: Quality of Education Poor


Quality of Education is PoorHough, Jack. "DON'T GET THAT COLLEGE DEGREE!" New York Post. 28 June 2009.

Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

In 2005, the Department of Education created a commission to study the college system and recommend

reforms. A year later, the Spellings Commission (named for then-Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings)

reported a long list of shortcomings, including "a remarkable absence of accountability mechanisms to ensure

that colleges succeed in educating students." It found "disturbing signs" that degree earners "have not actually

mastered the reading, writing and thinking skills we expect of college graduates." Literacy levels among collegegraduates, the commission noted, fell sharply over the 12 years ending in 2003. (2)

Arum, Richard, and Josipa Roksa. Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College

Campuses. Rep. University of Chicago Press, 28 Jan. 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

No statistically significant gains in critical thinking, complex reasoning and writing skills for 45 percent of the

students in the sample (13)

No statistically significant gains for 36 percent of the students over four years (14)

This study followed 2,341 students from 2005-2007 enrolled in 24 diverse four-year institutions and 1,666

students from 2005-2009 over 29 diverse four-year institutions. It tested these students in a wide range of

topics that gave insight into those students’ development of critical thinking, complex reasoning, etc. The

results are above and can be interpreted in this way: in the first two years of college, almost half of

sophomores learned little to nothing in the above critical learning areas, and by the end of college that

proportion decreased to a still-scary over one-third.

What follows are news reports dedicated to this study that analyze and reveal more trends from this in-

depth investigation of college education.





"A Lack Of Rigor Leaves Students 'Adrift' In College : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio. 9 Feb. 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

Part of the reason for a decline in critical thinking skills could be a decrease in academic rigor; 35 percent of

students reported studying five hours per week or less, and 50 percent said they didn't have a single course that

required 20 pages of writing in their previous semester.

According to the study, one possible reason for a decline in academic rigor and, consequentially, in writing and

reasoning skills, is that the principal evaluation of faculty performance comes from student evaluations at the

end of the semester. Those evaluations, Arum says, tend to coincide with the expected grade that the student

thinks he or she will receive from the instructor.

"There's a huge incentive set up in the system [for] asking students very little, grading them easily, entertaining

them, and your course evaluations will be high," Arum says. (1)

Overall, though, the study found that there has been a 50 percent decline in the number of hours a student

spends studying and preparing for classes from several decades ago.

"If you go out and talk to college freshmen today, they tell you something very interesting," Arum says. "Many

of them will say the following: 'I thought college and university was going to be harder than high school, and

my gosh, it turned out it's easier.' " (1)

Of course, if one were to apply themselves rigorously to studying, as well as choosing classes that were

truly beneficial and not just easy, then this point is easily defeated. The reality, however, is that too many

students are NOT studying hard enough, do NOT know the purpose of their education, and therefore

receive little benefit from a college education while paying significant costs.





Marklein, Mary Beth. "Report: First Two Years of College Show Small Gains." USAToday. 18 Jan. 2011. Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

•35% of students report spending five or fewer hours per week studying alone. Yet, despite an "ever-growing

emphasis" on study groups and collaborative projects, students who study in groups tend to have lower gains in

learning.

•50% said they never took a class in a typical semester where they wrote more than 20 pages; 32% never took a

course in a typical semester where they read more than 40 pages per week. (1)



January 2012 Pro: Some Students Not Suited for College


Some Students Not Suited—Waste of Money/Time"Are Too Many Students Going to College?" The Chronicle of Higher Education. 8 Nov. 2009. Web. 04


With student debt rising and more of those enrolled failing to graduate in four years, there is a growing

sentiment that college may not be the best option for all students.

It has been empirically demonstrated that doing well (B average or better) in a traditional college major in the

arts and sciences requires levels of linguistic and logical/mathematical ability that only 10 to 15 percent of the

nation's youth possess. That doesn't mean that only 10 to 15 percent should get more than a high-schooleducation. It does mean that the four-year residential program leading to a B.A. is the wrong model for a large

majority of young people. All high-school students should receive a cost-benefit analysis of the various options suitable to their situations:

four-year college, two-year degree program, short-term career-prep program, apprenticeship program, on-the-

job training, self-employment, the military. Students with weak academic records should be informed that, of

freshmen at "four year" colleges who graduated in the bottom 40 percent of their high-school class, two-thirds

won't graduate even if given eight and a half years. And that even if such students defy the odds, they will likely

graduate with a low GPA and a major in low demand by employers.

A large subset of our population should not go to college, or at least not at public expense. The number of new

jobs requiring a college degree is now less than the number of young adults graduating from universities, so

more and more graduates are filling jobs for which they are academically overqualified. "Who gets a good financial and/or personal return from college?" My answer: people in the top 25 percent of

academic ability who also have the work ethic to actually finish college. The other way to read this is: "For

whom is college attendance socially beneficial?" My answer: no more than 5 percent of high-school graduates,

because college is mostly what economists call a "signaling game." Most college courses teach few useful job

skills; their main function is to signal to employers that students are smart, hard-working, and conformist. The

upshot: Going to college is a lot like standing up at a concert to see better. Selfishly speaking, it works, but froma social point of view, we shouldn't encourage it.



January 2012 Pro: Negative Impact on Economy


Negative Impact on Society and Economy"Are Too Many Students Going to College?" The Chronicle of Higher Education. 8 Nov. 2009. Web. 04


College attendance, in my view, is usually a drain on our economy and society. Encouraging talented people to

spend many years in wasteful status contests deprives the economy of millions of man-years of output. If this

were really an "investment," of course, it might be worth it. But I see little connection between the skills that

students acquire in college and the skills they'll need later in life. Increasing college-going rates may actually hurt our economy. We now send 70 percent of high-schoolgraduates to college, up from 40 percent in 1970. At the same time, employers are accelerating their offshoring,

part-timing, and temping of as many white-collar jobs as possible. That results in ever more unemployed and

underemployed B.A.'s. Meanwhile, there's a shortage of tradespeople to take the Obama infrastructure-

rebuilding jobs.



January 2012 Pro: Cost to Taxpayers


Cost to TaxpayersKlor De Alva, Jorge, and Mark Scheider. Who Wins? Who Pays? The Economic Returns and Costs of a

Bachelor’s Degree. Rep. American Institutes for Research, May 2011. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.air.org/files/WhoWins_bookmarked_050411.pdf>.

Taxpayers also subsidize the education that students receive in most colleges and universities. This takes the

form mostly of direct state appropriations for public universities and tax exemptions for not-for-profit ones.

(Pg. 1)

Taxpayers subsidize bachelor’s degrees in nearly all not-for-profit institutions at around $8,000 per degree. In

public institutions, the taxpayer investment is more than $60,000. (Pg. 1)

Taxpayer subsidies increase dramatically among the most selective institutions, from almost $60,000 in the

most selective not-for-profit institutions to well over $100,000 in the most selective public institutions. (Pg. 1)

The range of annual taxpayer costs to educate a student is substantial, ranging from an actual gain for taxpayers

from for-profit schools of nearly $800 per student per year all the way up to a taxpayer cost of more than

$23,000 in the most selective public institutions. When we calculate the taxpayer cost per degree, we estimate

that taxpayers are investing around $108,000 for each degree awarded by the most selective public institutions

in the country, which is between 60 percent to 72 percent more than the amount they are investing in students in

less selective institution. (Pg. 12)



January 2012 Pro: Cost to Taxpayers




January 2012 Pro: Harms Economic Growth


Spending on Education Negatively Related to

Economic GrowthVedder, Richard. "Higher Education and Economic Development." Mackinac Center. 19

Jan. 2007. Web. 04 Dec. 2011. <http://www.mackinac.org/8175>.Please see Richard Veddder in the Author Index for more information

I took the economic growth of the states of our union from 1977 to 2002 — a 25-year period – and I related that

to state appropriations for higher during that period.

I found a statistically significant negative — negative — relationship between state spending on higher

education and the rate of economic growth. The more states spend, the lower the rate of growth.

The best historical example I could find involves [Michigan]. Let’s look at decades of the 1980s and the 1990s

and compare the higher education commitment of Michigan and Illinois against their economic performance.

In 1980, Michigan spent about 50 percent larger proportion of its income on higher education than did Illinois.

Michigan spent a lot relative to Illinois and in the next two decades, Michigan increased its state appropriation

for higher education.

It did this not only in absolute terms, or in inflation adjusted terms or population-inflation adjusted terms, but as

a percentage of personal income of this state, Michigan increased the percentage of personal income

considerably going to higher education, so that by 2000, the state of Michigan had the sixth highest proportion

in the nation. You devoted the sixth largest share of the total income of people of this state on state

appropriations to higher education of the 50 states of the union.

The gap between Michigan and Illinois widened since it did not follow this state’s policy of massive

appropriation increases for universities. In fact, the Illinois share fell. Yet, Michigan had less growth. In 2000,

per capita income in Illinois was 10 percent higher than in Michigan. In 1980 it was 5 percent higher. So the

growth deficit relative to Illinois about doubled despite a big expansion; despite a big commitment to education

in [Michingan]. Illinois made the smallest commitment to higher education but had the highest growth rate.



January 2012 Pro: State Investment Bad


State Investment in College has High Opportunity

CostVedder, Richard. "Higher Education and Economic Development." Mackinac Center. 19

Jan. 2007. Web. 04 Dec. 2011. <http://www.mackinac.org/8175>.Please see Richard Veddder in the Author Index for more information

Finally, let’s suppose that you’re debating in Michigan whether to greatly increase appropriations for Michigan

universities, or, as an alternative, let me pick something … lower the personal income tax from 3.9 to 3.6 or 3.5

percent. I’m just throwing out a hypothetical alternative. There’s a huge body of evidence that shows that lower

income taxes are associated with higher rates of economic growth. Therefore it is possible, maybe it’s even

probable, that the growth inducing effects of lower taxes would exceed any positive effects of increased state

appropriations.



January 2012 Pro: State Investment Bad


Costs Limiting AccessCensky, Annalyn. "Rising College Costs Price out Middle Class." CNN . 13 June 2011.

Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

According to the Department of Education, the portion of middle-income students that enrolled in four-year

colleges has dropped, while their enrollment in 2-year colleges has risen, over the last decade.

Many of these students, who would otherwise qualify for four-year college, are getting fewer job skills at

a time when employers are demanding just the opposite.

Economists speculate that one reason unemployment is so high is because the American workforce lacks theskills needed to fill the jobs that are open. As a result, companies may shift these jobs overseas, where wagesare often cheaper.

Seeing a portion of the middle class shift to two-year degrees certainly doesn't help the United States competein the global economy. (1)




Con Evidence



January 2012 Con: General


GeneralLewin, Tamar. "Burden of College Loans on Graduates Grows." The New York Times.

11 Apr. 2011. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

“College is still a really good deal,” said Cecilia Rouse, of Princeton, who served on Mr. Obama’s Council of

Economic Advisers. “Even if you don’t land a plum job, you’re still going to earn more over your lifetime, and

the vast majority of graduates can expect to cover their debts.” (1)

Greenstone, Michael, and Adam Looney. "Where is the Best Place to Invest $102,000 -- InStocks, Bonds, or a College Degree?" The Brookings Institution. 25 June 2011. Web.13 Dec. 2011.

Warren Buffett recently told Columbia Business school students, “Right now, I would pay $100,000 for 10

percent of the future earnings of any of you.” (Tucker, 2009). He is not a legendary value investor for nothing:

When compared to other investment options, a college degree stands out as one of the best investments one can

make. (1)



In today's society and economy, virtually everyone who has the motivation and stamina should acquire someform of postsecondary education. That is a practical reality of today's economy.

Winters: If we are speaking only in terms of a monetary benefit, then the cost of going to college outweighs the

benefit when the expected increase in lifetime income is surpassed by the cost of tuition, interest on student

loans, and forgone wages while in school. Given what we know about the large economic return for a year of

college, and even with tuition continuing to increase, we have not yet reached such a point. Maybe we never

will.

Schneider, Mark, and Michelle Yin. The High Cost of Low Graduation Rates: How Much Does Dropping

Out of College Really Cost? Rep. American Institutes for Research, Aug. 2011. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.<http://www.air.org/files/AIR_High_Cost_of_Low_Graduation_Aug2011.pdf>.

The Obama administration sees the successful completion of postsecondary education as essential to American

competitiveness. Governors likewise see the economic future of their states as dependent on the development of

a highly educated and skilled workforce that can compete with other states and other nations. (Pg. 1)





There also are more immediate reasons for governors to want more college graduates in their states. Accordingto the U.S. Census Bureau, young adults between the ages of 25 and 34 with a college degree, working year-

round, earn about 40 percent more than similar age adults with some college who have not completed a degree,

and about two-thirds more than similar age adults with just a high school diploma. These annual differences

accumulate over time, and the lifetime earnings of a college graduate can exceed those of a high school

graduate by as much as a half million dollars. Given these higher earnings, many governors are looking at a

more educated population as a way of dealing with the growing fiscal crises they face; most states have state

income taxes, and state treasuries benefit directly from the higher incomes earned by college graduates.

In short, for graduates, for taxpayers, and for policymakers, there are clear fiscal benefits to getting more

students to complete their college degrees. But remember, American colleges and universities are graduatingonly slightly more than half the students who walk through their doors. Much of the cost of dropping out is

borne by individual students, each of whom may accumulate large debts in the unsuccessful pursuit of a degree

and give up the higher earnings that accrue after obtaining a bachelor’s degree. (Pg. 1)

We are aware that the U.S. unemployment rate remains high, and this situation has raised questions about the

economic returns of earning a bachelor’s degree. Given current articles in the press about the hard times facing

college graduates, readers may question the size of the gains we have calculated in this report. However, we

believe that even in difficult economic times, students and federal and state governments stand to benefit

significantly from having more college graduates. First, unemployment rates vary significantly by educational

level: Americans with bachelor’s degrees and higher have an unemployment rate that is about half that of Americans with some college or associate degrees. Second, the most recent data from the American Community

Survey show that over time, even in tough economic times, a degree pays off. Finally, the current recession will

not last forever, and the bachelor’s degree has proven to have economic value in hard times and boom times

alike. (Pg. 2)





Williams, Adriane, and Watson Swail. Is More Better: The Impact of PostsecondaryEducation on the Economic and Social Well-Being of American Society. Rep.Educational Policy Institute, May 2005. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.<http://www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/gates.pdf>.Please see Educational Policy Institute in the Organization Index for more information.

Four-year graduates make almost twice as much as non-college graduates;

Four-year degree holders are more likely to be employed, and when unemployed, likely to find new jobs faster;

and

Even two-year degree holders are more likely to enjoy a higher quality of life than those who have only a highschool diploma.

The private economic returns to postsecondary education are real for every group and subgroup:

College graduates of every race and ethnicity, men and women, members of each socioeconomic group, and

families of all configurations are better off than their non-degree holding peers;

Non-wage economic benefits accrue to degree holders of all types:

• better employee benefit packages

• better health care• longer vacations

• better work condition

Studies show that people with postsecondary degrees enjoy

• increased life expectancy and better general health;

• improved quality of life for self and offspring; and

• increased social status



January 2012 Con: Lower Unemployment


Lower UnemploymentCarnevale, Anthony. "College Is Still Worth It." Inside Higher Ed . 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 03

Dec. 2011.

It is true that unemployment rates are relatively high among college grads. When it rains long enough and hard

enough, everyone gets wet. But the unemployment rate for all workers with college degrees is a quarter the rate

for high school graduates.

And it’s true, as the New York Times pointed out in an editorial on December 13, that the unemployment rate

for freshly minted college grads was 9.2 percent, not much different from the 9.8 percent unemployment rate for

all workers. But the Times didn’t bother to mention that the unemployment rate for freshly minted high school

graduates was 35 percent.

Greenstone, Michael, and Adam Looney. "How Do Recent College Grads Really StackUp? Employment and Earnings for Graduates of the Great Recession." The

Brookings Institution. 3 June 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

Data from a sample of the youth population in 2010 helps illustrate the advantages of entering the post-

recession economy armed with a college degree. The chart below shows the employment (blue bars) and

average weekly earnings (green line) of all 23-24 year olds who were not attending school in 2010. As we see in

the population, the differences in employment outcome by education are significant.



January 2012 Con: Lower Unemployment


(1)

Those with a college degree are in significantly better shape than their peers, with 88 percent of college

graduates employed in 2010. And, in addition to having a better chance of finding a job, they are making more

money. The average weekly earnings of those with a college degree was almost double the earnings of those

with only a high school diploma, at $581 versus $305.

Young adults with some college had an average employment rate of 79 percent. Those with only a high school

diploma had a much lower employment rate of 64 percent. Young adults without even a high school diploma

fared far worse—only 43 percent were working. (1)

This evidence is useful as its own point. However, it also serves as a counter to those who will claim thatrecent graduates are being disproportionally hurt by the recession and therefore at this time college isn’t

worth it. In fact, this shows that during a recession education is likely to serve as a security measure. It

can also counter the attack that college is risky because many people will not finish college and thus be

burdened with costs and no diploma. This evidence illustrates that even those who do not complete

college are still far better off than if they had simply stopped at a high school diploma.



January 2012 Con: Demand Rising


Demand for College-Educated Employees is High

and RisingCarnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education




By 2018, the economy will create 46.8 million openings—13.8 million brand-new jobs and 33 million

“replacement jobs,” positions vacated by workers who have retired or permanently left their occupations.

Nearly two-thirds of these 46.8 million jobs—some 63 percent—will require workers with at least some college

education. About 33 percent will require a Bachelor’s degree or better, while 30 percent will require some

college or a two-year Associate’s degree. Only 36 percent will require workers with just a high school diploma

or less. (Pg. 13)

This growth in demand for postsecondary education dovetails with two major trends. First, the fastest-growing

industries—such as computer and data processing services—require workers with disproportionately higher

education levels. Second, over time, occupations as a whole are steadily requiring more education. (Pg. 13)

For proof of this trend, just look at the statistics. In 1973, there were 25 million jobs that required applicantswith at least some college education (Figure 2.2). By 2007, that number had nearly quadrupled to 91 million

jobs. Since the early 1970s, the American economy has transformed from one that featured more jobs for high

school dropouts than for college graduates, to one where the share of jobs for dropouts has plunged from

roughly one-third to 11 percent. (Pg. 14)

Consider, too, that in 1973 only 28 percent of prime-age workers had any postsecondary education. By 2007

that number had climbed to 59 percent. In fact, the share of workers with an Associate’s degree, certificate, or

some college has more than doubled from 12 percent to 27 percent of the workforce. The percentage of workers

with Bachelor’s degrees also has more than doubled, from 9 percent in 1973 to 21 percent in 2007. Graduate

degree holders have increased at a slightly slower pace, going from 7 percent to 11 percent over the sameperiod. (Pg. 15)

This trend will only continue. By 2018, more than 63 percent of prime-age workers will need some type of

postsecondary instruction. The proportion of workers who will need an Associate’s degree, certificate, or some

college will increase from 27 percent in 2007 to 29 percent in 2018. The share of workers who must have





Bachelor’s degrees will climb from 21 percent to 23 percent, while the number who require graduate degreesmay decline slightly, from 11 percent to 10 percent over the same period. (Pg. 15)

Between 2008 and 2018 there will be just under 47 million job openings, which will include 14.4 million new

and 32.4 million replacement jobs. Some 29.9 million of these openings—63 percent of the total—will require

at least some college education. Even a cursory glance at the numbers show that the opportunities for workers at

the bottom end of the educational attainment spectrum are becoming much more limited. Here is a cumulative

look at how the 46.8 million openings will break down: (Pg. 26)

• 4.4 million, or 9 percent of the total, will be open to high school dropouts;

• 12.5 million, or 27 percent, will be open to workers with high school diplomas but no further education;

• 8.2 million, or 17 percent, will be open to workers with at least some college but no degree;

• 5.7 million, or 12 percent, will be open to workers with Associate’s degrees;

• 11.1 million, or 24 percent, will be open to workers with Bachelor’s degrees;

• 4.9 million, or 10 percent, will be open to workers with Master’s degrees or better.

Economists increasingly worry that America’s postsecondary education system cannot keep up with historic

increases in the demand for college-educated workers. To explore that concern, we created a stock and flow

model to forecast the supply of such workers through 2018. The worry is justified. Demand for workers with

college educations will outpace supply to the tune of 300,000 per year. By 2018, the postsecondary system will

have produced 3 million fewer college graduates than demanded by the labor market. (Pg. 16)






we are struck by the work of the Center on Education and the Workforce at Georgetown University. The Center

projects that the U.S. economy will create some 47 million job openings over the 10-year period ending in

2018. Nearly two-thirds of these jobs, in the Center’s estimation, will require that workers have at least some

post-secondary education (2)

Carnevale, Anthony. "College Is Still Worth It." Inside Higher Ed . 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2011/01/14/carnevale_college_is_still_worth_it_for_americans>.

It is important to note that current evidence demonstrates increasing demand for college graduates, and the

future promises more of the same. By 2018, our own projections from the “Help Wanted” study show that 63

percent of jobs nationwide will require some form of postsecondary degree.

The reality is that jobs come and go with economic cycles. But what lies beneath the economic cycles, and what

has remained constant, is the relentless engine of technological change that demands more skilled workers.

There is no indication that the trend has suddenly reversed itself.

Our own forthcoming research shows that we have under-produced college graduates by almost 10 millionsince 1983. We also find in Help Wanted that through 2018, at least three million jobs that require

postsecondary education and training will be unfilled due to lack of supply. The share of jobs for those with a

high school education or less is shrinking. In 1973, high school graduates and dropouts accounted for 72 percent

of jobs, while by 2007 it was 41 percent. The opposite has happened for those with at least some college: the

share of jobs has increased from 28 percent in 1973 to 59 percent in 2007, and is projected to be 63 percent by

2018. Likewise, the share of national wage income from college-educated workers has increased from 38

percent to 73 percent since 1970, and there is every reason to believe that this trend will continue.

We believe there is no doubt about the requirements of our fast-approaching economic future: we need more

college graduates, not fewer. But at the very time we need our higher-education system to kick into high gear, itis under pressure to apply the brakes instead.



January 2012 Con: Education Important During Recession


Education Particularly Important During RecessionCarnevale, Anthony. "College Is Still Worth It." Inside Higher Ed . 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2011.


Meanwhile, when jobs disappear, college is the best safe harbor for waiting out the recession and improving

your hiring prospects in anticipation of the recovery. Indeed, college-educated workers are much more likely to

be employed than their high school-educated counterparts, even during a recession.

Irrespective of the current economic conditions, individuals need to consider college as a lifelong investmentdecision. Likewise, the investment horizon for economic development needs to be measured in decades, not

annual budget cycles. Skipping or shortening college on the basis of a headline or even a few years of bad

economic news is foolish for individuals whose careers will span 40 or more years of working life. On average,

skipping an associate degree will cost a high school graduate half a million dollars in earnings, and skipping a

bachelor’s degree will cost $1 million in potential earnings over a lifetime.

• One of the criticisms associated with going to college at the moment is that there are such limited

jobs available that many graduates are unable to find work despite having invested heavily in their

education. This in turn is leaving them with significant amounts of student debt.

• As the above quote points out, skipping college is actually one of the worst things you can do during

a recession. Not only are there fewer jobs available, but those jobs that are lost are often low skill

jobs. Thus, although it may be hard for graduates to find a job, it is much harder for their less-

educated peers to find a job.

• Additionally, recessions eventually end and education can position one well to take advantage of the

rapid growth and innovation that tends to follow a recession.



January 2012 Con: Education Important During Recession


Degree Offers Protection in Poor EconomyCarnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education




Postsecondary education carries with it one more important advantage in today’s economy: protection. Workers

with college degrees had the lowest unemployment rates over the past three years, thus receiving the best

possible shelter from the Great Recession of 2007. They also have the best prospects for getting hired in the

recovery. This means that high school dropouts and graduates without some level of postsecondary education or

training are at increased risk of being left behind as the economy plods forward in the long march back to

normalcy. (Pg. 5)

Ultimately, when it rains long enough and hard enough, everyone gets a little wet. Recessions are like that too.

But postsecondary education and training is still the best umbrella in any economic storm. It is also an excellent

safe harbor where workers can wait out the storm and accumulate new knowledge and expertise to position

themselves for the surge in skilled jobs that the recovery will bring. The emphasis of the recovery will be

largely on skilled jobs. (Pg. 6)

Many people who lost jobs that required only a high school education or less will find that their relatively low-skill jobs will not come back at all, lost to automation or overseas competitors. Scores of these job seekers will

be left behind because the jobs that survived the recession and the jobs created in the recovery will require

postsecondary education or training. (Pg. 6)

The economy that emerges from the recession will be different than the economy that preceded it. This

recession, like the previous two, has intensified the underlying engine of economic change that has been evident

at least since the 1980–81 recession. The industrial economy of the 20th century has slowly transformed itself

into a new services economy that demands more education and different skills of its workers. (Pg. 6)

For many, a full recovery will be a hollow accomplishment. Hundreds of thousands of low-skill jobs inmanufacturing, farming, fishing, and forestry have been permanently destroyed because the recession has

further prompted employers to either automate those positions or ship them offshore to take advantage of cheap

labor. Overall, we project 637,000 jobs in the Manufacturing and Natural Resources industries will meet such

fates by 2018. (Pg. 11)



January 2012 Con: Knowledge Economy


Knowledge Economy Necessitates EducationWilliams, Adriane, and Watson Swail. Is More Better: The Impact of Postsecondary

Education on the Economic and Social Well-Being of American Society. Rep.Educational Policy Institute, May 2005. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.<http://www.educationalpolicy.org/pdf/gates.pdf>.Please see Educational Policy Institute in the Organization Index for more information.

Industrial production has given way to the knowledge industry and is now a thing of the past. Using data from

the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), we can look at occupational distribution in 2000 and project to 2010. In

2000, of the approximately 145 million workers in the US, 18 percent were professionals, 18 percent service

occupations, 16 percent office support, and 11 percent management. That leaves less than 40 percent of our

workforce devoted to farming, construction, maintenance, production, and transportation. Projections from 2000

to 2010 show a 15.2 percent growth in overall employment, with the two greatest areas of growth in

professional and related occupations and service occupations. Most other areas show slight declines over the

decade. (Pg. 10)

The fastest-growing occupations between 2000 and 2010 are expected to be in areas where a postsecondary

education credential is required. 8 of the top 10 percentage growth areas require a postsecondary degree—6 at

the BA level. Among the top 20, 14 require a postsecondary degree and 9 require a BA or higher. 8 of the top

10 are also computer related. (Pg. 11)

Not everyone is benefiting from the knowledge economy. A great and increasing divide exists between

educated and under-educated labor. According to Carnevale and Rose (1998), the average earnings of elite jobs

rose to $58,600 between 1979 and 1995, earnings for good jobs dropped 7 percent to $35,800, and earnings for

less skilled jobs dropped 16 percent to $24,000 (Carnevale and Rose 1998 , p.18).4 Getting a college degree and

getting an elite job is very beneficial and become more so, but for everyone who does not, and especially for

those who do not get a four-year degree, the future is darkening. (Pg. 14)



January 2012 Con: Positive Earning & Wages


General Positive Impact on Earning and Wages"Are Too Many Students Going to College?" The Chronicle of Higher Education. 8 Nov. 2009. Web. 04


With the disappearance of virtually all highly paid, low-skill jobs, the only way that most Americans can fulfill

their aspirations for middle-class status is through acquiring a higher-education credential and the skills that go

with it. From a practical standpoint, the credential is more important than specific skill sets. Employers know

that they are able to train qualified employees in specialized skills. For most employers, "qualified" means

having core skills like the ability to read, write, think clearly, and bring a strong work ethic to the task. It is

those core skills (and virtues) that higher education warrants.

The evidence for the individual economic benefits of college is overwhelming. While the wage premium for a

college education is not at its highest level ever, it is larger than it was five years ago, and typical four-year-

college graduates earn more than 50 percent above typical high-school graduates. Numerous careful statistical

studies reveal that a relatively small proportion of the gap is explained by differences in the characteristics of

students who go to college and those who do not.

Obviously there is considerable variation in earnings among those with similar levels of education, and it is not

difficult to find individuals who never went to college but earn more than some of those who graduated. Those

exceptions neither prove anything about the payoff of education nor provide sound examples for young people.Going to college is not a guaranteed investment, and we should do more to protect individuals against the risks

of the investment. But it is a wise investment for most people. Some people worry that those who miss out on

college now because of cost barriers or absence of good local options would have disappointing results if they

went. But the evidence is the opposite: People who get a little extra help that enables them to enroll get higher

returns, on average, than the typical student.

Those who argue that the bachelor's degree has lost its luster in the labor market are ignoring empirical evidence

to the contrary. As of 2005, after accounting for the differences between those who go to college and those who

do not, the premium for a year of college education was about 13 to 14 percent of an individual's weekly wage.

Employers clearly still value the general knowledge and work ethic that a student acquires in college. It isimportant to note that the benefits of attending college are found both across and within professions. Blue-collar

workers benefit nearly as much as white-collar workers from a year of college education. That is, going to

college makes you a better plumber than you would have been otherwise. Why? One reason might be that

college imparts nonacademic, social skills that can benefit blue-collar workers, who often must interact with

customers and clients who are themselves college-educated.





Impact on Quality of Life and EarningsCarnevale, Anthony. "College Is Still Worth It." Inside Higher Ed . 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 03

Dec. 2011.

Moreover, postsecondary education has become the only way to secure middle-class earnings in America and,

for the least advantaged among us, is now the only way to escape poverty. In 1970, about 60 percent of

Americans who attained middle-class status were high school graduates or dropouts. Today, only 46 percent can

be found there. In contrast, 44 percent of the top three income deciles had postsecondary education in 1970;

today, 81 percent do.

Greenstone, Michael, and Adam Looney. "Where is the Best Place to Invest $102,000 -- InStocks, Bonds, or a College Degree?" The Brookings Institution. 25 June 2011. Web.13 Dec. 2011.

We are including the setup to this evidence because it gives you a great idea on all of the costs of

education and how they are overcome. Additionally, you will have a better understanding of the

methodology of this study and therefore be better able to defend it in round.

As we are all aware, a college degree is a significant investment involving up-front costs of money and time.First, there are the financial outlays: the cost of tuition and fees (but not room and board—you need to eat and

sleep whether or not you go to college). The total average cost of a four-year college degree (public and private)

is roughly $48,000, and a two-year associate’s degree costs about $5,200.1

An additional cost of college is the foregone earnings or “opportunity cost” of not working. On average, 18 and

19 year olds right out of high school earn about $11,600 per year, while 20 and 21 year olds with a high school

degree average about $15,400 per year (this average reflects the fact that high school workers are less likely to

find a full-time job and more likely to be unemployed).

When you add up the various costs of college, the total investment for a four-year college degree is about$102,000; for a two-year associate’s degree, it’s about $28,000.

These significant costs lead to the question, “Is college worth it?” Put another way, would an 18 year old be

better served by investing in college or putting that money into the stock market or with some other type of

investment?





To answer this question, imagine that you sit down your 18 year old daughter and offer her $102,000 to eitherpay for college or to invest elsewhere. If she chooses to invest in college, she will have the job opportunities and

earnings of a college graduate for the remainder of her working years (until she is 65). If she chooses the latter,

she’ll face the job prospects and earning power of a high school graduate.

These two paths are starkly different, as shown in the following chart. At age 22, the average college graduate

earns about 70 percent more than the average person with a high school degree only. But that is only the

beginning. For instance, in 2010, a college graduate at age 50 (the peak of her career) earns approximately

$46,500 more than someone with only a high school diploma.





Further, at the peak of her earning power, the average worker with only a high school degree earns only aboutas much as a college graduate one year out of school. In other words, the average college graduate will surpass

the highest earnings of the average high school graduate soon after graduating. (1)

It’s clear that college graduates fare better than their peers with a high school degree only. But from an

investment perspective are these higher earnings worth the up-front cost of $102,000?

We answer this question by calculating the rate of return to college compared to other investments, shown in the

figure below. The $102,000 investment in a four-year college yields a rate of return of 15.2 percent per year—

more than double the average return over the last 60 years experienced in the stock market (6.8 percent), and

more than five times the return to investments in corporate bonds (2.9 percent), gold (2.3 percent), long-term

government bonds (2.2 percent), or housing (0.4 percent).





At first blush, the value of the associate’s degree really stands out because it provides a higher percentage returnof over 20 percent. However, this impressive return mostly reflects the much lower cost of an associate’s degree

relative to a four-year degree rather than a boost to long-run earnings. When compared to the lifetime earnings

of four-year college graduates, workers with an associate’s degree still earn a good deal less. Thus, the rate of

return does not tell the full story. (1)





Degree has Significant Positive Impact on WagesLevin, Henry, and Clive Belfield. The Costs and Benefits of an Excellent Education for All

of America’s Children. Rep. Columbia University, Jan. 2007. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.<http://www.cbcse.org/media/download_gallery/Leeds_Report_Final_Jan2007.pdf>.

The difference in lifetime earnings between a high school dropout and a college graduate is $950,000–

$1,387,000. (Pg. 7)

Carnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs andEducation Requirements through 2018. Rep. Georgetown University Center onEducation and the Workforce, June 2010. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.<http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/FullReport.pdf>.

Wage data, not surprisingly, correlate with this movement into and out of the middle class based on access to

postsecondary education. This means that the economy is demanding more and more workers with

postsecondary education and employers are willing to pay more for them.

Consider that, since 1983, among prime-age workers between the ages of 25 and 54:

• Earnings of high school dropouts have fallen by 2 percent;

• Earnings of high school graduates have increased by 13 percent;

• Earnings of people with some college or an Associate’s degree have increased by 15 percent;

• Earnings of people with Bachelor’s degrees have increased by 34 percent;

• Earnings of people with graduate degrees have increased by 55 percent.

Clearly, there is a hierarchical relationship between formal education level and annual wages, which reflects the

compensation that employers are willing to pay to workers, on average, for the knowledge, skills, and abilities

they attained at every consecutive education level.

College graduates earn more relative to high school graduates, and continue to do so, which is the mostsignificant signal that the economy is demanding more highly skilled workers.

The increased earning power conferred by postsecondary education and training is both tangible and lucrative

over a worker’s lifetime.

Among other things, the chart shows that:





• The range in lifetime earnings by educational attainment is greatest between high school dropouts andprofessional degrees—a range of $1,198,000 to $4,650,000, or a difference of $3,452,000.

• A high school degree is worth about $569,000 more than being a dropout.

• Having some college but no degree or a postsecondary certificate is worth about $473,000 more than a

high school degree.

• An Associate’s degree is worth about $15,000 more than some college but no degree.

• A Bachelor’s degree is worth about $1.1 million than an Associate’s degree.

• A Master’s degree is worth $457,000 more than a Bachelor’s degree.

• A Doctoral degree is worth about $193,000 more than a Master’s degree.

• A Professional degree is worth about $621,000 more than a Doctoral degree.





Klor De Alva, Jorge, and Mark Scheider. Who Wins? Who Pays? The Economic Returns and Costs of aBachelor’s Degree. Rep. American Institutes for Research, May 2011. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.air.org/files/WhoWins_bookmarked_050411.pdf>.

In terms of wages, a bachelor’s degree, whether from a public, a not-for-profit, or a for-profit institution, pays a

handsome net financial reward in comparison to a high school diploma—a reward that over a lifetime can vary,

on average, from more than $230,000 at less selective not-for-profit colleges (such as the University of

Bridgeport in Connecticut and Dowling College in New York) to well over $500,000 at the most competitive

public or not-for-profit institutions (such as the University of California at Los Angeles and Amherst College).

(Pg. 1)





Cheeseman Day, Jennifer, and Eric Newburger. The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings. Rep. U.S. Census Bureau, July 2002.Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

Over the past 25 years, earnings differences have grown among workers with different levels of educational

attainment. As Figure 2 shows, in 1975, full-time, year- round workers with a bachelor’s degree had 1.5 times

the annual earnings of workers with only a high school diploma. By 1999, this ratio had risen to 1.8. Workers

with an advanced degree, who earned 1.8 times the earnings of high school graduates in 1975, averaged 2.6

times the earnings of workers with a high school diploma in 1999. During the same period, the relative earnings

of the least educated workers fell. While in 1975, full-time, year-round workers without a high school diploma

earned 0.9 times the earnings of workers with a high school diploma; by 1999, they were earning only 0.7 times

the average earnings of high school graduates. (3)





Earnings estimates are about $1.0 million (in 1999 dollars) for high school dropouts, while completing highschool would increase earnings by another quarter-million dollars (to $1.2 million). People who attended some

college (but did not earn a degree) might expect work-life earnings of about $1.5 million, and slightly more for

people with associates degrees ($1.6 million). Over a work-life, individuals who have a bachelor’s degree

would earn on average $2.1 million — about one- third more than workers who did not finish college, and

nearly twice as much as workers with only a high school diploma. (3-4)

This study looks at earning from the ages of 25-64, and as such does not account for a major argument on

the Pro, namely that while students are in college and not earning, non-students can work. Even still, if

you were to add earnings for a high school educated worker from the ages of 18-25 at his/her average

salary of $30,400 this would not come close to matching the earnings of the college graduate. Account forthe likelihood that actual pay for those years is likely to be lower because of a lack of experience, that

high school graduates are less-likely to have full time jobs, and are more likely to be hurt in recessions,

then you can see the real value of a college education.





Wage Premium Rising Faster than CostCarnevale, Anthony. "College Is Still Worth It." Inside Higher Ed . 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2011.


While it is true that the sticker price cost of going to college has risen faster than the inflation rate, the college

wage premium has risen even faster, both in terms of the cost of going to college and the inflation rate. The best

measure of the value of college is the net present value of going to college. Here we discount the lifetime

earnings by the real interest rate, and discount the principal and interest payments from taking out a college loan

(a $60,000 loan). Once we've done that, the most accurate estimation of the average value of a college educationover a high school education is still $1 million dollars (net present value).

• The Pro side will often make the argument that college has simply gotten too expensive. That maybe

it was worth it when people did not have to take out so much debt or a student could put him orherself through college by working.

• However, college should be viewed as an investment and through this lens, it is clear that college is

an increasingly beneficial investment. Indeed, while the cost of a college education has risen

dramatically, the wage difference between a college graduate and a high school graduate has grown

even faster. In short, college is worth more now than it used to be and this difference in payoff

exceeds the difference in cost.





College Degree is the Only Route to a Middle Class

(or better) Job and LifeCarnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education




Postsecondary education has become the threshold requirement for a middle-class family income. (Pg. 3)

In the 37-year time frame shown in Table I, the share of people with some college or Associate’s degrees in the

middle class declined from 53 percent to 45 percent. But the key to understanding this phenomenon is

discerning where those people are going when they leave the middle. For example, the share of people with

Associate’s degrees in the top three income deciles increased from around 28 percent to 35 percent. Therefore,

while it is true that the middle class is declining, a more accurate portrayal of the American class dynamic

would be to say that the middle class is dispersing into two opposing streams of upwardly mobile college-haves

and downwardly mobile college-have-nots. (Pg. 3)

Dropouts, high school graduates, and people with some college but no degree are on the down escalator of

social mobility, falling out of the middle-income class and into the lower three deciles of family income. In1970, almost half (46 percent) of high school dropouts were in the middle class. By 2007, the share of dropouts

in the middle class had fallen to 33 percent.(Pg.3)

In 1970, almost 60 percent of high school graduates were in the middle class. By 2007, the share had fallen to

45 percent. (Pg. 4)

Over that same period, people with college degrees (Bachelor’s and graduate degrees) have either stayed in the

middle class or boarded the escalator upwards to the highest three family income deciles. (Pg. 4)

The share of people with Bachelor’s degrees in the middle class declined from 47 percent to 38 percent,

decreasing by 9 percentage points. But the share of people with a Bachelor’s degree in the top three income

deciles jumped from 37 percent to 48 percent. Meanwhile, the share of people with graduate degrees in the

middle class declined from 46 to 30 percent—a decrease of 16 percentage points. But, clearly, they were

leaving for greener pastures, as the share of people with graduate degrees in the top three income deciles

increased from 41 to 61 percent. (Pg. 4)



January 2012 Con: Education Good in Poor Economy


Education Important for Subsequent TrainingCarnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education




Still, the role of colleges and universities is vital. Among other things, higher education acts as an important

gateway to other parts of the postsecondary learning system. Postsecondary education provides entry to the jobs

offering the most employer-provided training, plus access to the most powerful, flexible workplace technology.

This is reflected in the positive correlation between employer-provided training and employee education levels.

College graduates are almost twice as likely as high school graduates to receive formal training from

their employers (Pg. 1).

Access to that training is important because it directly affects an employee’s earning power. Training can

increase employee wages by 3 to 11 percent, with formal training providing higher returns than informal

training. (Pg. 2)

Education, workplace training, and workplace technology tend to be sequential and complementary in

producing productivity and earnings. Higher levels of formal education not only increase access to jobs that

provide further training, they also increase access to technology that complements, rather than replaces, skills.More highly educated workers use technologies that increase worker autonomy and enhance skills—desktop

computers or flexible machine tools, for instance. (Pg. 2)



January 2012 Con: Outlook for Uneducated Bad


Working Uneducated Jobs Is UnsustainableThe Blue Collar Occupations include jobs in the Manufacturing; Construction; Natural Resources; Installation

and Repair; and Transportation industries. All of these have been hard hit by the Great Recession of 2007.

Construction alone accounts for 20 percent of all job losses since the recession began. (Pg. 21)

The prospects for long-term growth among Blue Collar Occupations are not good. Over time these occupations

will be significantly affected by automation, industry consolidation, and offshore competition. The effects of

these forces will be to automate and send repetitive tasks offshore, and increase the requirements for skill and

productivity in the jobs that remain. (Pg. 21)



January 2012 Con: Technology Drives Demand


Technology Drives Demand for EducationCarnevale, Anthony, Nicole Smith, and Jeff Strohl. Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education




So, let’s pause for a quick recap: demand for education and training is on the rise. And jobs, overall, are

requiring more and more postsecondary preparation, regardless of industry. What is driving this transformation

of the American economy? In a word: technology. (Pg. 15)

Integral to this trend is a concept borrowed from labor economics, known as “skill-biased technological

change.” This simply means that technological development and the organizational changes that come with it

favor workers with more education because they have the expertise needed to handle more complex tasks and

activities. Demand for these workers, in turn, grows across the board as the technology spreads throughout the

economy. (Pg. 16)

In this case, the technology in question is information technology. Like electricity in the industrial age, the

computer is a general purpose technology that works across industries and in the larger society. (Pg. 16)

A recent McKinsey Global Institute report suggests that too few American workers are equipped with the skillsrequired to fill attractive jobs in the economy’s new growth sectors. In fact, the study claims, 71 percent of U.S.

workers are in jobs for which there is either low demand from employers, an oversupply of eligible workers, or

both. These numbers suggest that unless we can find a way to educate the American workforce for the

complexities of the knowledge economy, we risk leaving hundreds of thousands of workers behind. (Pg. 16)



January 2012 Con: General Benefit to Society


General Benefit to Society and EconomyWilliams, Adriane, and Watson Swail. Is More Better: The Impact of Postsecondary


If it is agreed that the US is in the midst of an economic shift from an industrial economy to a knowledge

economy, then having more college-educated citizens may indeed lead to greater economic benefits for the

society. An economy that depends more on innovation and management of services requires skills that are

presumed to be gained at the postsecondary level.

One body of research considers individual benefits in the aggregate and suggests that society profits from larger

numbers of postsecondary degree holders as long as those degree holders enjoy economic rewards. According

to research in this area, when individuals benefit, society does as well. Degree holders:

• pay more taxes;

• buy more goods and services;

• are more productive; and

• require less government support through social service programs like Medicaid and Temporary Aid for

eedy Families (TANF).

At the societal level, the non-economic benefits that accrue include

• lower rates of incarceration;

• higher rates of volunteerism; and

• higher voter participation rate

The employment rates cited earlier can also be considered economic benefits for local and national economies.

The tax revenues generated from high-income people are a public economic benefit; and the lower levels of social program spending reflect economic benefits for the public as well. (Pg. 15)





Non-white college graduates paid $6,200 in taxes, and white, non-Hispanic women paid $8,100. Thus, the totalgovernment savings for a college graduate as compared to a high school dropout was in excess of $10,000. With

disposable income added in, total net return was around $20,000. (Pg. 17)





Brooks, David. "The Wrong Inequality." The New York Times. 31 Oct. 2011. Web. 15Dec. 2011.

Over the past several decades, the economic benefits of education have steadily risen. In 1979, the averagecollege graduate made 38 percent more than the average high school graduate, according to the Fed chairman,Ben Bernanke. Now the average college graduate makes more than 75 percent more.

Moreover, college graduates have become good at passing down advantages to their children. If you are bornwith parents who are college graduates, your odds of getting through college are excellent. If you are born tohigh school grads, your odds are terrible.

In fact, the income differentials understate the chasm between college and high school grads. In the 1970s, highschool and college grads had very similar family structures. Today, college grads are much more likely to getmarried, they are much less likely to get divorced and they are much, much less likely to have a child out of wedlock.

Today, college grads are much less likely to smoke than high school grads, they are less likely to be obese, theyare more likely to be active in their communities, they have much more social trust, they speak many morewords to their children at home.

Some research suggests that college grads have much bigger friendship networks than high school grads. Thesocial divide is even starker than the income divide. (1)



[College education] is of critical importance to [our society and our economy]. In the emerging global

economy, our greatest competitive vulnerability is our nation's failure to close the higher-education credentials

gap between middle-income and lower-income families.

Increasing college-attendance rates in the United States is essential to reducing income inequality and

maintaining our stature as a world economic leader. Our economic dominance in the second half of the 20th

century was directly related to our educational dominance. The United States was the first nation to provide

basic education to all people regardless of their income. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the educated

American worker was far more productive than his illiterate overseas cousin. That advantage made our nation

rich. However, while other nations eventually caught on and caught up, American educational outcomes have

stagnated since the late 1970s. We have lost our educational advantage.



January 2012 Con: Higher Tax Revenues Good


Higher Tax Payments Benefit SocietyLevin, Henry, and Clive Belfield. The Costs and Benefits of an Excellent Education for All of America’s

Children. Rep. Columbia University, Jan. 2007. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.cbcse.org/media/download_gallery/Leeds_Report_Final_Jan2007.pdf>.

Persons educated to high school and beyond pay considerably more in taxes. Male dropouts pay approximately

$200,000 in taxes over the lifetime. Male high school graduates pay an additional $76,000–$153,000 and those

who graduate from college pay an extra $503,000–$674,000. Female dropouts pay under $100,000 in taxes.

Female high school graduates pay $66,000–$84,000 extra and female college graduates contribute $348,000–

$407,000 extra. (Pg. 9)






A professional who earns, on median, $95,699 (2003), pay an estimated $26,235 in taxes, including income tax,

FICA, and state and local taxes. Conversely, a high school graduate who earns, on median, $30,755 pays

$6,695, or less than one quarter the total amount of the professional. Put another way, it takes four high school

graduates to pay the equivalent in taxation as one professional. A BA recipient earns approximately $50,000

and pays $11,940 in taxes. (Pg. 15)

• Up to this point, this brief has focused on how attending college is a sound decision for an individual

as the benefits outweigh the costs in their life. However, it is equally true (if not more so) that society

benefits from having its members attend college and go through life as a more educated, typically

higher earning individual.• As discussed in following sections, the benefits are diverse and numerous, ranging from lower

incarceration rates to less use of welfare. However, the evidence provided in this section is

particularly compelling as going to college tends to result in dramatically higher tax revenues for the

state. At a time when states all around the country are teetering on the verge of bankruptcy or

significant budget cuts, such a boost would we well received. Indeed, college is one of the best

investments that societies can make in their citizens.



January 2012 Con: Lower Healthcare Costs


Lower Healthcare Costs Benefit SocietyLevin, Henry, and Clive Belfield. The Costs and Benefits of an Excellent Education for All of America’s



High school graduates have improved health status and lower rates of mortality than high school dropouts.

Those with college education fare even better. One might therefore anticipate significant savings to the public

health care system as education levels increase. Those with higher educational attainment are less likely to use

public programs such as Medicaid and they typically have higher quality jobs that provide health insurance. (9)

The costs vary by gender and race, but the educational impacts are significant. For white females, for example,

a dropout will receive $60,800 in Medicaid and Medicare payments or services over the lifetime up to 65. A

high school graduate will receive $23,200 and a college graduate $3,600. (Pg. 11)



January 2012 Con: Lower Healthcare Costs



Medicaid: Increases in education reduced the reliance on Medicaid. For women, regardless of race/ethnicity or

naturalization status, receipt of a high school diploma reduced annual Medicaid spending by an average of

$400. Medicare spending for a college graduate as compared to a high school dropout was reduced by

approximately $550 and $850 dollars, depending on the group. The reduction also was apparent for men, but at

a ratio of about 1:3 of that of women.


In every income level and age group, people with bachelor’s degrees report that they are healthier. The choice

to disaggregate by income level helps to dispel what could be a concern that earning more puts one in a better

position to take care of one’s health. The study shows that even those with bachelor’s degrees earning very

little, less than $20,000 a year, report themselves healthier than do those with some college. (Pg. 24)



January 2012 Con: Lower Welfare Costs


Lower Welfare Costs Benefit SocietyLevin, Henry, and Clive Belfield. The Costs and Benefits of an Excellent Education for All of America’s



Being a high school graduate is associated with a lower probability of TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy

Families) receipt by 40%, of housing assistance by 1%, and food stamps by 19%. For those with some college

or above, welfare receipt is even more sharply reduced: by 62% for TANF, by 35% for housing assistance, and

by 54% for food stamps. (Pg. 16)



January 2012 Con: Lower Welfare Costs



Welfare: The cost of welfare per person drops significantly with increased educational attainment. For instance,

the average annual welfare cost for a white, non-Hispanic female high school dropout of age 30 was estimated

at $623 annually, compared to two-thirds that amount for a high school graduate and almost zero for a college

graduate. Over 32 years, the discounted savings for a white, non-Hispanic female high school graduate

compared to a high school dropout would total $7,545 in 1997 dollars. However, it should be noted that thegreatest impact on welfare reduction is between a high school dropout and a high school graduate. Higher levels

of education further reduce the welfare burden, but the greatest percentage reductions occur between the two

lower levels cited.



January 2012 Con: Failure to Graduate Costs


High Societal Costs of Failing to GraduateSchneider, Mark, and Michelle Yin. The High Cost of Low Graduation Rates: How Much Does Dropping

Out of College Really Cost? Rep. American Institutes for Research, Aug. 2011. Web. 4 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.air.org/files/AIR_High_Cost_of_Low_Graduation_Aug2011.pdf>.

But low college graduation rates also cost taxpayers dearly. Each and every year, through government

appropriations and student grant programs, taxpayers send millions upon millions of dollars to colleges and

universities to support students who do not return to their colleges after the first year. In a 2010 report,

American Institutes for Research (AIR) showed that states spend more than $1.3 billion per year on students

who drop out during their first year of college; the federal government spends an additional $300 million per

year. (Pg. 2)

For students who started in fall 2002 as full-time students seeking a bachelor’s degree but failed to graduate six

years later, the cost to the nation was approximately

• $3 .8 billion in lost income;

• $566 million in lost federal income taxes; and

• $164 million in lost state income taxes.

These estimated losses are for one year and for one class of students. Because the losses for these studentsaccumulate year after year, these estimates understate the overall costs of low college graduation rates. Further,

this report focuses on only one cohort of students; however, losses of this magnitude are incurred by each and

every college class. In short, there are high costs for low graduation rates borne by individual students, by their

families, and by taxpayers in each state and the nation as a whole. (Pg. 1)

In 14 states, the income losses from this cohort of students exceed $100 million annually—ranging from

California, with close to $390 million in lost income, and New York, with close to $360 million, and decreasing

to Louisiana, Massachusetts, North Carolina, and New Jersey, all between $101 million and $107 million in lost

income.





These losses are paralleled by federal income tax losses ranging from more than $50 million per year in

California, New York, and Texas to approximately $15 million in Massachusetts, North Carolina, and New

Jersey. Remember that this is just one cohort and just one year’s loss. (Pg. 5)

If we look at the cumulative losses over the work life of this cohort, the numbers are staggering. In California,

college dropouts are losing nearly $15 billion in earnings over their work lives, costing the federal government

more than $3 billion in lost income taxes. College dropouts from New York and Texas are losing more than $13

billion in earnings over their lifetime and more than $2 .5 billion in federal taxes. Dropouts in other states,

including Illinois and Florida, are losing more than $5 billion in lifetime earnings and more than $1 billion in

federal taxes. These are high losses for both the college dropout and for taxpayers. (Pg. 6)

Of more immediate interest to governors and state legislators will be our estimates of lost state income tax

receipts. The amount lost is a function not only of the forgone income but also of state income tax rates. Thereare ten states that lost more than $5 million from this one cohort in 2010 state tax receipts. These losses range

from large states with high taxes, such as California and New York, where the annual loss of state income taxes

comes to more than $20 million; through Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia, with annual losses from this

cohort at approximately $7 million; through the remaining top ten losers—Michigan, Pennsylvania, Ohio,

Massachusetts, and Illinois—at approximately$5 million. (Pg. 6)





When we look at the cumulative losses to state treasuries over the work lives of these dropouts, the losses rangefrom more than $1 billion in state income taxes in California, to $934 million in New York, and more than $200

million in each of the remaining eight states listed in the table. Again, these numbers are for a single cohort of

students—and every year, tens of thousands of students drop out of college, creating a never-ending cumulative

loss for all of us. (Pg. 6)

In short, not only are states spending large amounts of money educating students who drop out, but these

dropouts also are costing states millions of dollars in lost tax revenues. (Pg. 7)



January 2012 Con: Benefits Civic Engagement


Increased Civic EngagementWilliams, Adriane, and Watson Swail. Is More Better: The Impact of Postsecondary


In an attempt to understand why individuals in the U.S. seem more isolated today than they did in the post-

WWII years, Putnam (1995a; 1995b) embarked on a study of American civic society. He asked, who votes?

Who is involved in civic organizations and clubs? A basic assumption in his work is that it is better to be

involved in society than to be “bowling alone.” This point is debatable, but does have some grounding in the

basis of a democratic society. During his analysis, Putnam found that education is more significantly

correlated with civic engagement than any other variable. Putnam’s (1995; 1995) finding of a significant

correlation between educational attainment and civic engagement is supported by the work of Dee (2004).

Using the national datasets High School and Beyond and General Social Surveys, Dee found that higher

educational attainment positively affects voter participation, group memberships, attitudes toward free

speech, and newspaper readership, which he uses to define civic awareness. If one agrees that these are

social benefits, then Dee has found that higher levels of attainment benefit society. (Pg. 26)

Incarceration: Only one-tenth of one percent of people with bachelor’s degrees were incarcerated in 1997,

while 19 times as many high school dropouts were incarcerated and 12 times as many people with only high

school diplomas were imprisoned. (Pg. 27)

Volunteerism: People with bachelor’s degrees volunteer more with a median of 60 hours of volunteer work

per year (Baum and Payea 2004). Those who stop schooling at high school volunteer fewer than 50 hours. Most

interesting about these statistics is that 45.6 percent of bachelor’s degree holders are volunteering many hours,

while only 21.7 percent of those with high school diplomas are volunteering. Volunteerism is an indication of

both the time that people have to commit to others in their communities, but also the sense of connection they

have. This idea, social capital, is of central concern in Putnam’s work. (Pg. 27)





Voting: Voting is the civic benefit that IHEP (1998), the College Board (Baum and Payea 2004), Dee (2004),and Putnam (1995) point to as crucially important. Voting increases steadily with additional years of education,

through the bachelor’s degree. (Pg. 27)

•

One of the foundations upon which our democracy is build is an educated citizenry. As the evidencein this section suggests, not only is it the case that educated people tend to make better political

decisions, they also engage in the civic proves more whether that is through voting or volunteering.

• Both of these are crucial to the well-being of the American democracy and although they are

intangible and difficult to quantify, should not be left out of your case. Regardless of the condition of

the economy, the interest rate on student loans or job availability, an educated and involved citizenry

is always a good thing and college does a great deal to support that.





Education Provide High Return on Societal

Investment through Productivity Increases


There is sufficient evidence to support the idea that “rising schooling completion” contributes to economic

growth for two reasons. First, there are correlations across nations between economic growth rates and school

enrollment rates, and second, US technological industries experienced rapid growth and employed well-

educated labor at high rates. In the end, it is still difficult to determine the exact impact of postsecondary

education on growth. (Pg. 19)

Nations that invest in both tangible and intangible educational capital have higher levels of educational output

and thus productivity. According to results, educational capital constituted 15 to 20 percent of productivity, just

over half the estimate of 42 percent found in growth accounting, which has been discounted as overstating theeffects of education. The rate of return in this instance is 9.4 percent. (Pg. 19)

Overall spending, according to their study of data from 1979 to 1984, was very much related to economic

growth. Thus, investment in higher education stimulates economic growth, according to the authors. More

recently, Trostel (2003) echoed this sentiment. (Pg. 21)




Pro Counters



January 2012 Pro Counters: Unemployment Similar


Unemployment Similar Between College and

Non-College Educated Workers

"College, Jobs and Inequality." The New York Times. 13 Dec. 2010. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/14/opinion/14tue1.html>.

Over the past year, for example, the unemployment rate for college grads under age 25 has averaged 9.2

percent, up from 8.8 percent a year earlier and 5.8 percent in the first year of the recession that began inDecember 2007. That means recent grads have about the same level of unemployment as the general

population. It also suggests that many employed recent grads may be doing work that doesn’t require a college

degree.

Even more disturbing, there is no guarantee that unemployed or underemployed college grads will move into

much better jobs as conditions improve. Early bouts of joblessness, or starting in a lower-level job with lower

pay, can mean lower levels of career attainment and earnings over a lifetime. Graduates who have been out of

work or underemployed in the downturn may also find themselves at a competitive disadvantage with freshly

minted college graduates as the economy improves.



January 2012 Pro Counters: College Earning Over-stated


Million Dollar Premium is WrongLederman, Doug. "College Isn't Worth a Million Dollars." Inside Higher Ed. 7 Apr. 2008.

Web. 03 Dec. 2011. <http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/04/07/miller>.

Properly using the present value of the lifetime earnings, adjusted for the cost of going to college and the

difference in the number of working years, and excluding those graduates with advanced degrees, calculated at

the three percent discount rate used in the report," he wrote, "produces a lifetime earnings differential of only

$279,893 for a bachelor's degree versus a high school degree!

College Board officials concede some of Miller's points. They acknowledge, first, that the widely used million

dollar figure is wrong, exaggerating the personal benefit to the average degree holder, and that there could well

come a point, if tuitions continue to skyrocket, when the payoff of a higher education would fail to be worth it.

The primary difference between the number above and the 1 million dollar which is often tossed around

is that this new and updated number assumes that most students will take 5-6 years to graduate college

given the ever-decreasing 4 year graduation rates. This means more years of paying tuition and fewer

years of working.

Pilon, Mary. "Earnings Gap Between College and High School Grads Small." The WallStreet Journal. 2 Feb. 2010. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

Mark Schneider, a vice president of the American Institutes for Research, a nonprofit research organization

based in Washington, calls it "a million-dollar misunderstanding."

One problem he sees with the estimates: They don't take into account deductions from income taxes or breaks in

employment. Nor do they factor in debt, particularly student debt loads, which have ballooned for both public

and private colleges in recent years. In addition, the income data used for the Census estimates is from 1999,

when total expenses for tuition and fees at the average four-year private college were $15,518 per year. For the

2009-10 school year, that number has risen to $26,273, and it continues to increase at a rate higher than

inflation.

Dr. Schneider estimated the actual lifetime-earnings advantage for college graduates is a mere $279,893 in a

report he wrote last year. He included tuition payments and discounted earning streams, putting them into

present value. He also used actual salary data for graduates 10 years after they completed their degrees to

measure incomes. Even among graduates of top-tier institutions, the earnings came in well below the million-

dollar mark, he says. (1)



January 2012 Pro Counters: College Earning Over-stated


"Averages don't tell the whole story," says Lauren Asher, president of the Institute for College Access &

Success, a nonprofit group based in Berkeley, Calif. She points out that incomes vary widely, especially basedon majors. "The truth is that no one can predict for you exactly what you're going to earn," she says.

And that includes the College Board, which recently said on its Web site: "Over a lifetime, the gap in earning

potential between a high-school diploma and a bachelor of arts is more than $800,000. In other words, whatever

sacrifices you and your child make for [a] college education in the short term are more than repaid in the long

term."

The $800,000 number, it turns out, was pulled from a footnote of the College Board's 2007 "Education Pays"

report that explained lifetime earnings. The report's author, Sandy Baum—an emeritus Skidmore College

economics professor who didn't write the promotional text on the Web site—says that $450,000 is actually a

more reasonable estimate of the difference in lifetime earnings, something she's said in interviews for more than

a year. (1)

Steve Talbott, a journalism professor at Cleveland State University who is researching the cost of education and

student-loan debt, says he urged the College Board to take down the "misleading use" of the $800,000 number a

year ago. Others have voiced their objections to the College Board figure via letters and blogs.

A College Board spokeswoman says it doesn't have a record of when the content was written and that "it's

possible that during an update of the content the writer misinterpreted the data within the report." She also says

the text represented old data and reflected "a different methodology." The $800,000 figure was removed from

its Web site in December, once the group learned of the error, she says. (1)



January 2012 Pro Counters: Job Growth Low


Job Growth in Degree-Requiring Sectors is LowWilliams, Adriane, and Watson Swail. Is More Better: The Impact of Postsecondary


The greatest job growth between 2000 and 2010 is expected to be in food preparation and service, including fast

food, with an increase of 673,000 jobs, or 30 percent higher than at the start of the decade. Other gainers include

customer service representatives (631,000), registered nurses (561,000), and retail salespersons (510,000).

Among the top 10 with respect to actual job growth, 3 will require a postsecondary degree and only 1 will

require a BA. Of the top 20, 6 will require a postsecondary credential and 4 will require a BA. (Pg. 12)

Whereas we saw that 8 of the top 10 percentage growth occupations involved computers, only 2 of the top job

growth areas involved computers, and only 3 of the top 20. Thus, one must be careful in using percentages

alone. Growth in food preparation will be more than double the actual job growth of computer software

engineering. A large percentage change in a small occupational niche can be deceiving. (Pg. 12)




Con Counters



January 2012 Con Counters: Debt is Good Investment


Debt is a Good Investment

Lewin, Tamar. "Burden of College Loans on Graduates Grows." The New York Times.11 Apr. 2011. Web. 3 Dec. 2011.

Susan Dynarski, a professor of education and public policy at the University of Michigan, said student debt

could generally be seen as a sensible investment in a lifetime of higher earnings. “When you think about what’s

good debt and what’s bad debt, student loans fall into the realm of good debt, like mortgages,” ProfessorDynarski said. “It’s an investment that pays off over the whole life cycle.” (1)

According to a College Board report issued last fall, median earnings of bachelor’s degree recipients working

full time year-round in 2008 were $55,700, or $21,900 more than the median earnings of high school graduates

And their unemployment rate was far lower.

So Sandy Baum, a higher education policy analyst and senior fellow at George Washington University, a co-

author of the report, said she was not concerned, from a broader perspective, that student debt was growing so

fast. (1)



January 2012 Con Counters: Remediation Success


Remediated Students SucceedBetinger, Eric, and Bridget Long. ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF UNDER-PREPARED

STUDENTS IN HIGHER EDUCATION: DOES COLLEGE REMEDIATIONWORK? Rep. NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, May 2005.Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

students in remedial math courses are nearly 10 percent less likely to drop out than similar students. Likewise,

remediated students are more likely to complete a bachelor's degree. (17)

students in English remediation are 9.7 percent less likely to drop out and 9.3 percent more likely to graduate

(17)

In summary, we estimate that students in remediation have better educational outcomes in comparison to

students with similar backgrounds and preparation who were not required to take the courses. (20)

Over five years, math and English remediation are estimated to reduce the likelihood of dropping out and

increase the likelihood of completing a degree. Moreover, English remediation appears to reduce the likelihood

of transferring to a less selective or lower level college. (20)

An argument the Pro might present is that most students go into college unprepared and are likely to fail.

However, this study finds that students who go into remedial college classes are more likely to succeed

than if they had not tried at all, or if they had gone into traditional college classes right away. This shows

that colleges have set up programs to help students succeed and limit the risks of college costs.



January 2012 Con Counters: Underutilized Still Better


Underutilized College Grads Better Off Than High

School GraduatesSum, Andrew. Labor Underutilization Impacts of the Great Recession of 2007-2009:

Variations in Labor Underutilization Problems Across Age, Gender, Race-Ethnic,Educational Attainment and Occupational Groups in the U.S., 2009 FourthQuarter. Rep. Center for Labor Market Studies, Northeastern University, Mar.

2010. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Those adults with formal education beyond high school were significantly less likely to be underutilized with

BA holders being 5.4 percentage points less likely to be underutilized than high school graduates and those with

Master’s or higher degrees being 6 percentage points less likely to be underutilized. (19)

Rampbell, Catherine. "Many With New College Degree Find the Job Market Humbling."The New York Times. 18 May 2011. Web. 14 Dec. 2011.

An analysis by The New York Times of Labor Department data about college graduates aged 25 to 34 foundthat the number of these workers employed in food service, restaurants and bars had risen 17 percent in 2009from 2008, though the sample size was small. There were similar or bigger employment increases at gasstations and fuel dealers, food and alcohol stores, and taxi and limousine services.

This may be a waste of a college degree, but it also displaces the less-educated workers who wouldnormally take these jobs.

“The less schooling you had, the more likely you were to get thrown out of the labor market altogether,”said Mr. Sum, noting that unemployment rates for high school graduates and dropouts are always muchhigher than those for college graduates. “There is complete displacement all the way down.” (1)



January 2012 Con Counters: Non-traditional Jobs Benefit


Non-Traditional Jobs Benefit From College

EducationLeonhardt, David. "Even for Cashiers, College Pays Off." The New York Times. 25 June

2011. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

Another study being released this weekend — by Anthony Carnevale and Stephen J. Rose of Georgetown —breaks down the college premium by occupations and shows that college has big benefits even in many fields

where a degree is not crucial.

Construction workers, police officers, plumbers, retail salespeople and secretaries, among others, makesignificantly more with a degree than without one. Why? Education helps people do higher-skilled work, get jobs with better-paying companies or open their own businesses. (1)



January 2012 Con Counters: Statistics Undervalue Degree


BLS Statistics Undervalue DegreeCarnevale, Anthony. "College Is Still Worth It." Inside Higher Ed . 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2011.


Those who make the “skip college” argument often bolster their arguments with official state and national

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data suggesting that the U.S. higher education system has been turning out far

more college grads than current or future job openings require.

To a public wary of paying steep tuition bills in a depressed economy, it all sounds alarming and -- with thebacking of national and state government BLS data -- authoritative.

There's just one problem with the official BLS statistics: they’re wrong.

BLS data assigns occupations a "required" education level. Their numbers assert that 16.6 percent of jobs, or

nearly 25 million jobs, require a bachelor’s; in reality, over 30.7 million jobs, or 20.4 percent are filled with

workers who have a bachelor’s.

The BLS also holds that 6.1 million jobs (4.1 percent) require an associate degree, when 14 million jobs across

the economy are actually filled by those with associate-degree holders. The BLS data, therefore, imply that

Americans are overeducated.

The most persuasive evidence that the BLS numbers are wrong are earnings data, which show that employers

across the country pay a "wage premium" to college graduates, even in occupations that BLS does not consider

"college" jobs. This simply means that businesses pay more money to workers with degrees than to those

without because employers believe that postsecondary educated workers are more valuable.

And employers aren’t just hiring degrees. Over the decades, this premium has ebbed and flowed, but the longer-

term trend in demand for college graduates has risen consistently. The college wage premium over high school

graduates dropped significantly in the 1970s when vast numbers of college-educated Baby Boomers and males

who went to college instead of Vietnam flooded the job market.

Bureau of Labor Statistics data, as mentioned, underpin the argument that America overproduces college

graduates by the millions. Among the chronically overqualified and overpaid are 43 percent of nuclear

technicians who have attained more than the “required” associate degree, and the 80 percent of commercial

pilots who hold more than their “required” certificate.



January 2012 Con Counters: Statistics Undervalue Degree


One significant flaw in the BLS method is that it categorizes occupations as either "college" or "non-college," a

methodology that is both subjective and static.

For one, it misses the shift toward increased postsecondary requirements within occupations that are not

traditionally deemed "college jobs." Labor economists agree that there has been a consistent shift toward

increased postsecondary requirements across a growing share of occupations that previously did not require

two- or four-year college degrees. Examples in the white-collar world include increasing demand for college

degrees among managers, health care workers, and a wide variety of office workers, from insurance agents to

building inspectors. Examples in the blue- and pink-collar world include increasing degree requirements among

production workers, health care technicians, and utility and transportation workers.

There are, then, a number of serious flaws with the BLS education demand numbers, ranging from the

designation of college and non-college occupations to their failure to reflect rising education requirements

across virtually every occupational category. BLS numbers are widely used by social scientists to gauge

education demand, and yet their accuracy receives little serious scrutiny.

For instance, when we compare the BLS projections for 2006 and the actual count of people in the labor force

with degrees during that year, we see that the Bureau undercounted the true number of postsecondary-educated

workers by 17 million in 2006, or roughly 30 percent, and by 22 million, or 40 percent in 2008.

The bottom line is that the BLS predictions didn’t even come close to what actually happened in the economy.The only way to reconcile those projections with real life is to assert that the Bureau's projections reflect the

number of college degrees employers actually require, not the actual numbers of college-educated workers they

decide to hire. If this is the case, then employers not only hired millions of overqualified workers in 2006 and

2008, but paid wage premiums of more than 70 percent for the privilege -- a notion, as we said earlier, that

requires a belief that business owners across the nation and economic markets as a whole have taken leave of

their senses.



January 2012 Con Counters: Over Education Exaggerated


Over-education is ExaggeratedCarnevale, Anthony. "College Is Still Worth It." Inside Higher Ed . 14 Jan. 2011. Web. 03 Dec. 2011.


These kinds of mismatches between degrees and low-skilled jobs -- a phenomenon sometimes called "over-

education" -- are relatively small in number and don’t matter much in an economy of nearly 150 million jobs. In

addition, most such workers won't stay in those positions long-term. They eventually move on to better-paying

jobs. Over a 10-year period, each cashier job has 13 incumbents who permanently leave the occupation; amongmedical doctors, that replacement rate is only one.

People rarely leave jobs that require a college education because they have the best earnings, benefits and

working conditions. There are many more brain surgeons who used to be cashiers than there are cashiers who

used to be brain surgeons. A brain surgeon never starts as a brain surgeon, but would have likely had all types

of jobs before entering college and medical school. Most jobs people hold in high school are in retail, food

services, and other low-skill, low-wage jobs, and future brain surgeons are no exception.

In addition, low-skill, non-college positions tend to be greatly overrepresented in the official jobs data because

so many of them are part-time. Although low-wage, low-skill jobs make up 20 percent of all jobs in a single

year, they only make up 14 percent of the hours worked. Jobs that require a BA or better make up 30 percent of

all jobs, but 75 percent of those are full-time, full-year jobs, compared with 64 percent of jobs that require a

high school diploma or less.



January 2012 Con Counters: For-Profits Remedied


Dangers of For-Profit Can Be Avoided"Cracking down on For-profit Colleges." The Week Magazine. 16 Sept. 2011. Web. 15

Dec. 2011. <http://theweek.com/article/index/219247/cracking-down-on-for-profit-colleges>.

So what is the government doing?

The Department of Education recently approved new rules blocking federal aid to a for-profit school if less than

35 percent of its former students are actively paying down their loans. (1)

Will for-profits survive?

Their image has clearly taken a big hit, and many are toning down their recruiting tactics. As a result, new-

student enrollment fell an average of 14.1 percent for the summer quarter at 10 of the biggest for-profit

institutions. Kaplan reported a 47 percent decline in new-student enrollments in its summer quarter, and the

exclusively online Capella Education, which has some 38,000 students, reported a drop of nearly 36 percent

earlier in the year. For-profit schools now "have a huge bull's-eye on them," said Kevin Kinser, an associate

professor at the State University of New York at Albany who studies the industry. "They can't risk business as

usual anymore." (1)

Korn, Melissa. "Party Ends at For-Profit Schools." The Wall Street Journal. 23 Aug.2011. Web. 15 Dec. 2011.

For-profit colleges are facing a tough test: getting new students to enroll.

New-student enrollments have plunged—in some cases by more than 45%—in recent months, reflecting twofactors: Companies have pulled back on aggressive recruiting practices amid criticism over their high student-loan default rates. And many would-be students are questioning the potential pay-off for degrees that can costconsiderably more than what's available at local community colleges. (1)

Undergraduate new-student enrollment fell 25.6% at DeVry's namesake university in the quarter ended June 30.(1)

At Corinthian, which implemented changes to its recruiter compensation in April, new-student enrollmentdeclined 21.5% in the first calendar quarter, compared with an 8% decline in the previous quarter. (1)



January 2012 Con Counters: Justify Increasing Costs


Increasing Costs JustifiedArchibald, Robert, and David Feldman. "Why Does College Cost So Much?" Forbes. 11

Aug. 2011. Web. 13 Dec. 2011.

First, like many personal services, including much of health care, the law and banking, higher education

remains essentially an artisanal industry. These are industries in which technological progress has not reduced

the number of labor hours needed to "produce" the service. By contrast, labor productivity in basic

manufacturing has soared, and this is why the cost of a year of college has gone up compared with the purchaseprice of a basic car or a basket of groceries.

Students interacting directly with professors and other students in small groups remain a benchmark of quality

in education. Ask any family if they want their son or daughter to learn in small group seminars taught by

tenured professors, or if they prefer giant impersonal lectures or online chat rooms monitored by adjunct

teachers who answer lots of e-mail questions. (1-2)

Secondly, higher education shares with many other personal services a reliance on an extremely highly educated

labor force. Starting in the late 1970s, the cost of hiring highly educated people began a sustained rise. This has

driven up costs in any industry that cannot easily shed expensive labor. (2)

Lastly, technological change affects higher education directly. But unlike steel or autos, where the primary

impact of new techniques is to reduce the amount of labor or energy it takes to make the product, new

technology in higher education tends to change what we do and how we do it. Colleges must offer an education

that gives students the tools they need to succeed in the modern economy. The contemporary chemistry student,

for instance, needs to be familiar with current laboratory tools, and they are more expensive than the chalk-and-

test-tube world of the past. As in modern medicine, there is a standard of care that higher education must meet,

and that standard is set in the labor market that hires our graduates.

Our story of rising cost is devoid of bad people making bad decisions. This means that there are no simple fixes,

like price controls, that would not also reduce the quality of the education we offer. (2)




Contentions



January 2012 Pro Contentions


Pro Contentions

Contention One: The costs of a college education are growing, while the benefits are decreasing.

In 2009, spending by Americans for post-secondary education totaled $461 billion, an amount 42% greater than

in 2000, after accounting for inflation, and that’s not including the previous two decades where costs rapidly

rose as well. How are students paying for this cost? Well the College Board reports that college loans are near

$1 trillion, which surpasses all credit card debt combined in this nation. Defaults on these loans are rising, and

unlike a mortgage, they cannot be shed in bankruptcy so these loans will follow you for life. But, why can’tstudents pay back their loans? As CNN reports, adjusting for inflation, college-level earnings have actually

declined $400 since 1988. This is a major blow to proponents of a college education who often tout increased

earnings over high school graduates. Yet, the real reason for going to college is supposed to be knowledge, and

here colleges fail too. A study published in 2011 followed thousands of students in tens of different universities

and found that in their first two years of college, a whole 45% of students showed no statistically significant

gains in critical thinking, complex reasoning, and writing skills. After four years, that number was still 36%,

over one third of all students. This has a real impact on jobs that graduates hope to find. Unprepared and ill-

educated, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reveals that 17 million people with college degrees are working in jobs

that do not require one. These people would have been better off going straight into the workforce and gaining

valuable experience and wages.



January 2012 Pro Contentions


Contention Two: There are better alternatives for many young Americans

Surprisingly, the cost of a college education has become so high, that a family would be better off investing in

broad stock market investments. The Wall Street Journal reports that at the market’s average annual return over

the past 40 years, the funds needed for a college education could instead be invested over 40 years for a return

of $3 million. Investor and president of Formula Capital James Altucher found the value of an invested sum

equivalent to the cost of education to end up at $2.8 million over 50 years with a more conservative rate of

return at 5%. Given that most experts calculate the extra earnings from a college degree to be between 270,00

and 800,000 dollars you can see that a college education costs far too much for its return. But in addition to this,

we believe there are better working alternatives to a college education. Certification and training programs for

jobs like electrician, plumber, or dental hygienist are effective and a study by Georgetown University found that27% of jobs in these types of industries earn more than employees with a Bachelor’s degree with minimal cost.

Additionally, the President’s Council of Economic Advisers released a report that found growth among these

types of jobs will be faster than jobs requiring a Bachelor’s degree. Too many people are pushed into the

college track without clear purpose—they take on debt only to drop out. Instead, we should encourage much of

the college population to consider cost-effective alternatives.

Contention Three: The Current System of College Education Harms the Nation’s Economy

We also need to look at this resolution holistically. Because the nation and states invest in public education, we

are paying for college students to attend schools. One problem with this is that our K-12 education system hascreated a society that over values college education. Our society pushed so many students into college and many

are not prepared. Studies by state education boards and organizations like the ACT find that students are not up

to college standards. Forty percent of students in Texas must take remedial classes when they get to college—

classes that cover high school material—and this number goes up to nearly 75% in states like Oregon and

Connecticut. Remedial education in public universities costs the federal government between $2.31 and $2.89

billion annually; this does not include substantial state costs. These students are 10 times more likely to drop out

of college anyway, leaving taxpayers with the bill. We must restructure education to avoid this problem but as it

stands right now, these costs outweigh the benefits. Moreover, Professor Richard Vedder finds a statistically

significant negative relationship between state spending on secondary education and economic growth. This

means that as spending goes up, growth goes down. It might be possible to one day restructure education so thatstudents come prepared to college, costs are limited, and job prospects are plentiful. However, that is not the

reality we are dealing with today.



January 2012 Con Contentions


Con Contentions

Contention One: Benefits to Society Outweigh Costs

To simply look at this resolution from the perspective of the individual is to overlook the significant

benefits that accrue to society when an individual graduates from college. Indeed, a college decree is linked to

everything from lower welfare usage to higher civic engagement and, perhaps most importantly, greater tax

payments. Indeed, a report by Columbia University economist Henry Levin found that “over their lifetime, male

college graduates will contribute an extra $503,000–$674,000 in taxes. Similarly, female college graduates

contribute $348,000–$407,000 extra.” Aggregated, this means that people failing to graduate college has led to$566 million in lost federal income taxes; and$164 million in lost state income taxes. Not only are these tax

receipts substantial but the benefit to the state is actually even larger as healthcare costs are lower for graduates

(by up to 20K per person according to Levin) and their usage of social welfare is nearly nonexistent. Clearly,

from a monetary standpoint, attending college is massively beneficial to the state. By the time you factor in

intangible such as civic engagement and productivity increases, there is simply no way that the costs outweigh.

Contention Two: College is a Sound Financial Investment Individually

When college is viewed as a lifelong investment, the benefits clearly outweigh the costs. Numerous

studies including one by Georgetown economy Anthony Carnevale have found that attending college can leadto a lifetime earnings increase of approximately one million dollars. Given the fact that even the most selective

and prestigious schools in the country do not exceed 60K in annual tuition costs, it is hard to see how, over

someone’s life, college is not a sound financial decision. Indeed, Michael Greenstone of the Brookings

Institution finds that “when you add up the various costs of college, the total investment for a four-year college

degree is about $102,000.” This cost is often made up for by the time the person is in their 30s leaving them

with a life of increased prosperity and satisfaction.



January 2012 Con Contentions

Contention Three: College is Only Route to Middle Class or Better

Thanks to the global recession, a weak job market and rising inequality in America, there are fewer and

fewer quality jobs out there. Unsurprisingly, these “good” jobs are almost always awarded to college-educated

people. This is reflected both in the differing unemployment rates (9.2 percent for fresh college graduates versus

an astonishing 35 percent for fresh high school graduates) and in the fact that most jobs require additional

training—much of which can only be completed by people who have the skills college endows people with.

Indeed, “college graduates are almost twice as likely as high school graduates to receive formal training from

their employers. Access to that training is important because it directly affects an employee’s earning power.

Training can increase employee wages by 3 to 11 percent.” When these factors combine with a recession that

has hit blue-collar jobs particularly hard (20% of job loss has come in sectors such as construction) the picturefor non-college graduates is particularly grim. This leads Anthony Carnevale to conclude that failing to hold a

college degree makes it more likely that one will not be in the middle class. This trend has only gotten worse

over time. As he notes, “in 1970, almost 60 percent of high school graduates were in the middle class. By 2007,

the share had fallen to 45 percent.” On the other hand, people with college degrees now dominate the top three

income deciles with people who hold graduate degrees accounting for over 60 percent—a number that does not

even include your typical college graduates. Indeed, the rich in America are almost exclusively college

graduates—failing to get a college degree removes the prospect of a high quality of life for all but a lucky few

who manage to sneak into the middle class.

advancedleveljanuarybrief (1)

Documents