Confessions of a Former College Administrator

It occurred to me that if I am going to call this blog what I am calling it, maybe I should confess something.

Nothing juicy. Just an internal conflict I have long wrestled with, that previous entries have hinted at.

I worked for an open admissions, non-profit professional college. I directed Academic Support and Advising so worked extensively with many of the more "at risk" students in the school.

When I first started at the school, the tuition was low. Very low. Several thousand for an entire year. However, as has happened at many schools, it sky rocketed and is now closer to $20,000 a year. It used to be open admissions gave students a chance to "experiment" with a profession and it didn't cost them too much if they didn't make it.

As tuition increased, no longer.

Some of the open admission students we worked with we knew were not going to make it. They came from impossible backgrounds. While they had a high school degree, they had no academic preparation. There were behavioral issues. Sometimes even dependency issues. Since the school was open admissions, we had to take them. We might advise the weaker ones to defer or not attend, but they usually ignored us.

Let me give you a case study. This is a composite student. Unfortunately, not exaggerated. Possibly even less extreme than some I have experienced.

He was a new student who had barely graduated high school. His high school grade point average (GPA) was under 2.00, and though he was quite affable, he openly admitted he hated school. Yet he had taken out a loan for more than $10,000 and was attending college. Once the term started, he did not show up for many classes, nor turn in any work.  It was clear to everyone who met with him he was not engaged by school and had no idea why he was there. However, he was also resistant to all advising and could not be counseled out. Since he had paid his tuition for the semester, we felt it was our ethical obligation to try and get him through.

And we did our best. We did a group intervention. We case-managed him through the semester, passing him from person to person. . His adviser  met with him weekly. I or another tutor would sit down with him whenever we could. He was given extensions (that he met). And he pulled it together enough to get a C and passed the semester. He ended up on probation, but he passed.

Possibly a success story?

Then for the second semester he paid his tuition and tanked. He sporadically attended classes up to the deadline to keep his financial aid, then vanished. There were rumors of a serious family crisis but we never got any sort of documentation. We had to chase him down just to make sure he was still alive. He took a 0.00 GPA for the term and never returned.

So we put all this time and effort into getting him through that first semester -  all so he could pay the school another semester of tuition but get nothing for it

Theoretically, there was no way to know positively that this student would not make it. But after you work with enough students like this, you get a sense of who will turn the corner and who won't. He wasn't going to.  It was pretty clear from the start this student wasn't going to make it. Did we do him a disservice by not letting him flunk out that first semester? We did the ethical thing by helping him. Helping him extensively. But the ethical thing ended up putting him an extra few thousand dollars in debt. (I have seen students running financial aid scams. This is a student I would not put in that category.)

Which way is up here? I have had many students like this at several different schools. Some, against all odds, graduated. Some stayed in school an extra semester or two and paid a lot of tuition. Did I help really help them or did I just cost them more money?

I just want to know I am more part of the solution than part of the problem.

Collateral Damage in Higher Education -- Part 2

Please click here for Part I of this entry. 

I left off in Part 1 by throwing the higher education establishment under the bus (especially the most Progressive parts), essentially claiming we have been involved in perhaps the largest (and most officially sanctioned) bait-and-switch in history. I want to further explore this idea.

But three clarifications first.

First I don't think my claim applies to all schools. I think it mainly applies to schools who service the type of populations I am talking about.  This is probably some second-tier, and most third-tier, schools, as well as many public institutions.

Second, I LOVE the idea of education equaling opportunity. I have worked with first-generation and at-risk populations for years. They may be my favorite students. I am NOT saying we need to limit opportunity. I am just saying that the opportunity we currently present may not be the opportunity we believe it is. Wanting something to be good does not mean it is good.

Third, I am not assigning malicious intent here. I think most of us have good intentions. We WANT to be doing good. If this is a bait-and-switch, then in a way we ourselves have been deceived. (Or we have let ourselves be deceived.)

However, even if we have been somewhat "deceived", we still have abetted  in this process. We went to college ourselves. We drank the Kool-Aid, liked the taste, and wanted to share. So we have told the younger generation that they too should go. And we have meant it! We have sold the narrative. Teachers. Guidance counselors. Parents. Politicians. Advocates. College Administrators. College Professors.  We have given the hard sell to the population that can least afford to go to college. And since we are their "trusted advisers" and since we so sincerely believe in what we are saying, we are very convincing. They listen to us.   They go to college and take out loans in the process. 

Much has been said recently about students graduating with college degrees and debilitating debt. This is not good, but at least they have the credential. At least they have the potential to move forward.

I am more concerned about all the students who don't finish college but still have this debt!

The for-profits have been (deservedly) crucified for predatory recruiting and having unqualified students take out loans. But even though intentions may be more "honorable" on the non-profit side (I hope), many of  the outcomes are the same.

We tell ourselves we are doing good because we are engaged in Education. (Which is a much nobler cause than profit!) We tell ourselves, our intentions are good.That allows us to look at the problem and perhaps not see our complicity.

But how come all these good intentions at the individual level seem to add up to so much dysfunction? How come they seems to create (an unethical) system that often takes far more than it gives? Yes, there is the Principle of Unintended Consequences, but this seems bigger than just that. What is going on here? 

I think part of the problem lies in a dated meta-narrative. The current college narrative is about a world that no longer exists (if it ever did).We want to believe a college degree is this ticket to a better life. And, if one can afford to not go into debt, it still most definitely is. However, these days many (most?) seem to have to go into debt and this debt level is rising. The present reality differs from the ideal world spun in the meta-narrative. 

In the world of finance, mutual fund companies often sell their funds by pointing out past performance. However, critics are oft heard to say that “past performance does not guarantee future results.” Just because a fund has returned 25% a year for the past five years doesn't mean that it will do so the next five years. In fact, if performance “returns to the mean”, it may very well under-perform.

Yet we sell college based on past performance. A performance that took place in a rapidly receding world, a world that was more affordable and had better public support. One that contrasts sharply with our current world:

• A world where college tuition rates have outpaced inflation for years.
• A world where “financial aid” for most students means loans (that cannot be discharged in bankruptcy).
• A world that is deeply indebted at both private and public levels and where public funding is consequently at risk

I am not saying that college still cannot be a good thing. I am claiming that we need to recognize that we may be playing by a set of rules for a game that longer exists. We may have good intentions, but by reciting dated arguments, we may actually be more part of the problem than part of the solution.

Over the last couple years, it seems there have been several new reports that confirm college is still "worth the investment." The problem is that these results cite  a "statistical" figure. It does not predict how a given student will do. It predicts how the theoretical average student will do. The student who comes out of high school with a 1.7 Grade Point Average is not average, but now that student thinks he should go to college to get his payoff. ( Keep in mind, that 1.7 GPA student is balanced out in the calculations by the 4.0 GPA student who will be going to Harvard and earning six-figures upon graduation.)

 The Right may be guilty of cuts, but the Left (at least some of us) can be said to be guilty of tunnel-visioned thinking . We continue to recite the meta-narrative and blindly push students toward a system that, for many, is just as likely to beggar as lead to success. We tell ourselves it provides opportunity, but we selectively focus on those for whom it has actually done so; we avoid looking at the many for which it has not.

There is nothing we can do about the past. We can only change things moving forward. However, I think we need to stop hiding in a dated mythos of higher education and recognize the world for what it is. Problem solving needs to take place for this world. We don't have to like the way things are, but we can't pretend they are anything but what they are. If opportunity and access are still going to be major aspect of education, we need to rethink how it can be done else we will be actively complicit.

What do we do? I am honestly not sure. I guess that is what this blog is for. However, I do want to refer to an earlier post A Few Ground Rules. I think there I begin to lay out a lens to approach the problem. It will not be easy. (In fact, I worry that it is near impossible.) But if we really care, we have to try. If we just sit back and accept the status quo as the "cost of doing business", I think we are being unethical.