Inside Higher Ed reports that college students across the U.S. have been staging protests in solidarity with the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations:
In true Occupy Wall Street fashion, the campus protesters didn’t have any specific demands. Instead, they spoke out against the general issues that have long plagued students: high debt, rising tuition, the privatization of public education and uneven distribution of wealth.
At the State University of New York at Albany walkout, about half of the 300 or so protesters managed to secure an hour to express their concerns to President George Philip in an open forum in the administration building. He reportedly agreed with some of their qualms, but upset many when he told them, “I’m not giving you back my pension.” The president of the New School, David E. Van Zandt, meanwhile, issued a supportive statement that encouraged students “to devise peaceful, practical solutions to longstanding problems of inequality.”
The article considers how many students at various campuses did (or did not) walk out of classes or turn up for demonstrations, and why that might be (e.g., it’s easier to indicate on Facebook that you’ll attend an event than it might be actually to attend it — especially with midterm exams looming). Still, in an age where we old farts tend to shake our heads at student apathy, there seems to be growing a palpable sense of discontent that may bubble into action. From the article:
Lettie Stratton, a St. Lawrence senior, said that regardless of who turned out to protest, many could relate.
“Our overall goal was really just to create a dialogue and get people talking about what matters to them,” Stratton said. “As students, we’re part of the 99 percent,” she said, referring to the Occupy Wall Street slogan describing the vast majority of the American population who aren’t super-rich. “Crippled with student loans, we’re already behind before we even have a chance to set foot in the real world.
“I think a big part of this is speaking out against ignorance and realizing that 99 percent can make a change. We also want to make sure that it doesn’t stop today – we want people to keep talking about it. It’s not just like, ‘Oh, the protest is over, so let’s go back to doing nothing.’ ”
For those of you who aren’t dealing with college students on a daily basis, it is important to recognize the context in which students are raising these objections. These are not the perennial student gripes about not having a plan for what to do after graduation, or not being able to find a job immediately after graduation that feels like a career, if not a calling.
As much as the economy has not been improving for those of us who are not CEOs, it has been even worse for college students.
It’s not just that the so-called “job creators” have created precious few jobs, but that employers are now explicitly seeking to hire job applicants who already have jobs. (The logic of this strikes me as of a piece with banks that only want to lend money to people who already have money.) The young people who went to college to prepare themselves to enter the work force are, of course, less likely to already have jobs (since they went to college to acquire the skills and credentials and such to get jobs). In most cases, the jobs they’re working while they are students are not the jobs they hope to be working for the rest of their adult lives.
Basically, we have a generation that has been urged to go to college because it was purportedly a reliable route to a middle-class standard of living. No one warned them that the middle class might be squeezed nearly out of existence.
Depending on your views about the point of a college education (here’s how I described mine five years ago, in the shadow of the dot-com bust), you might extend special sympathy to the students who opted for the “prudent” route of selecting some practical major that helped them acquired a focused set of skills and credentials that could plug them right in to some existing career path. They might have wanted to major in something less practical, like philosophy or history or English (or even a more theoretical science), but they wanted to know that they’d be employable immediately after graduation.
The lack of even such well-defined jobs must make recent graduates feel pretty cheated.
Well, we older people might reply, at least they (or their liberal arts major compatriots) got the enrichment of a college education, which is something a lot of working stiffs (and unemployed folks) never get. Indeed, you might expect me to say something like this, given my earlier defense of “impractical” majors:
A job is nice. So is political power, a fancy chariot, hangers-on. But you can have all these things and still not be happy or fulfilled. And, if your happiness depends on having such things, you’re pretty vulnerable to sudden reversals.
So how can a human find fulfillment that isn’t all about having lots of stuff, or a high-paying job, or a top-rated sit-com?
Well, what do you have that’s really yours? What is the piece of your life that no one can take away?
You have your mind. You have the ability to think about things, to experience the world, to decide what matters to you and how you want to pursue it. You have your sense of curiousity and wonder when you encounter something new and unexpected, and your sense of satisfaction when you figure something out. You have the power to imagine ways the world could be different. You even have the ability (the responsibility?) to try to make the world different.
This is what I think a college education should give you: lots of hands-on experience using your mind so you know different ways you can think about things and you start to figure out what you care about.
I still think a college education should give you experience using your mind in lots of different ways, and that this does impart skills (although broad ones, not just narrow ones) that can be of use in the workplace as well as in life.
However, I also wrote:
There is always the danger of going overboard with the idea that the life of the mind is the only life that matters, which could be used as an excuse to get people to pipe down about truly horrible material conditions. And, a mind is not invulnerable to certain kinds of threats, whether natural or man-made. Still, I’d rather have a supple mind than a whole bucketful of skills so specialized they might only be useful for another six months.
Now, we have a situation where even the most practical majors cannot count on employment at graduation. We’ve created an economy where people who have taken all the prudent steps to enter the world of work — often while assuming significant debt to earn their degrees — cannot find jobs!
(Even at public universities, student debt is a big deal. When state budgets get tight, student fees go up. Cutting instructional staff means fewer sections of courses students need to graduate — which means more years in school and more term bills to pay. Plus, more and more of those courses needed to graduate are being shifted outside of the regular academic calendar to summer sessions and winter sessions. These special sessions don’t receive the same level of support from the state, so students have to pay a lot more to take the same classes in them — essentially, privatizing some of the instruction at public universities.)
It strikes me that we, as a society, owe college students and recent college graduates more.
We should want our government, and our society more broadly, to take care of its members (including its youth) at least as well as its banks.
It is reasonable for the youth to want people in government, in the private sector, in the media (hello corporate ownership) to hear their voices, their grievances, and their hopes for the future even if they can’t spare thousands of dollars to make campaign donations, or to incorporate.
If Mitt Romney is right that corporations are people, what he didn’t mention is that many of them are legal persons that suck — sucking all the attention of our policy makers, all the best tax benefits, all the reflexive good will of the mainstream media. Meanwhile, what have these legal persons done for young people lately besides jacking up the interest on their student loans and the fees on their debit cards?
Young people are entitled to their anger and frustration, and they are reasonable in recognizing the need to go outside normal channels to get the attention of those with the power to change things. I’m hopeful that this leads them to pursue some concerted action when election time comes around — to hack our system and start dismantling the structures that currently ensure that no matter which of the two major parties wins, the corporations can keep on keeping on.
So … where do the faculty stand in all of this? Where should we stand?
I think we need to be committed to delivering the highest quality education we can to our students given the resources we have. (We do have to recognize, though, that with the resources we have right now, we may not be able to deliver the education we think our students deserve without hurting ourselves.)
We need also to be honest with our students about how crummy the economy is, and how dismal their job prospects may be.
Further, we need to do what we can to change the conditions that make the economic future our students face so very dismal. That responsibility doesn’t belong solely to the people teaching college students, though — it belongs to the generations who came before them, especially those who were able to parlay a college education into a middle-class existence.
(We also owe it to people in our society who don’t go to college to provide conditions for them to live decent lives … but at least they’re not laboring under the expectation that their education is a ticket to economic stability.)
Some of us have seen already that the folks at the top of the power pyramid will try to play students and faculty off against each other — to make it look like a forced choice between delivering promised pensions to faculty and raising student fees, for example. We owe it to ourselves and each other to resist this zero-sum-game framing that exempts administrators and corporations from sharing sacrifice in meaningful ways.
Philosophers may have a well-earned reputation for corrupting the youth, but we have no interest in eating our young. We must find a way to go forward and build a society that has room for us all.
* * * * *
If you want to support the younger generations of our society in a tangible way, please consider donating to a project on my DonorsChoose giving page. Even a few dollars can bring a public school classroom closer to providing the kind of engaging math and science education that our kids deserve.
How are college professors offering a service for ever more money (tuition) any different from bankers offering services for ever more money (ATM fees)?
Keeping in mind that the vast majority of people in ‘banking’ as an industry are, after all, the 99%. Those guys on the other side of the citibank credit card customer service line, they are much more the 99% than many profs (yes, I know a tenured prof or two in the 300k/year range).
Universities tend not to be people, so they don’t have to pay taxes. But as people they too suck sometimes.
Point taken, those in the employ of the banks are just as likely to be getting squeezed while serving their corporate masters as are professors at public universities trying to do the administration’s bidding. Maybe this means we need to keep our eyes on the folks who are putting the squeeze on and going home to sleep at night on beds made of money. (In my university system, though, the $300k/year and greater salaries seem to be reserved for the administrators at the very top — university presidents and the chancellor of the system.)
Universities can, indeed, suck. Professors, staff, and mid-food-chain administrators who prioritize delivering high quality education to students (and maybe also fostering reasonable conditions in which faculty and students can build new knowledge) can make their universities less sucky.
Letting the people who aren’t getting squeezed play various populations who are getting squeezed against each other, though, seems like a recipe for maintaining the status quo.
Glad to see you will be voting Republican in the next election!
I think she meant change for the better, not the worse!
Another terrible practice that I see is that there are just not enough sections offered of required courses. Students can’t get into the courses they need to graduate, causing many of them (even those that have not changed majors – which should be allowable!) to take 5 years to finish. This adds an entire extra year of tuition onto the cost of their education.
Yep. And then they get nastygrams from the Registrar’s office for taking more time than they are supposed to take – the famous “Finish in Four” program, for example. You can’t have it both ways. You want people graduating in four years? PROVIDE THEM THE CLASSES THEN. Sheesh.
Thank you for describing this generation’s plight so accurately.
Part of the problem that we have is that we’ve trained our children to accept being shunted into an assembly line of education leading to professional jobs that are supposed to lead to greater prosperity, without training them to look critically at the market and plan their job prospects according to the niches that need to be filled. If they did that, they would have no difficulty finding jobs. There are still career paths that are hiring, and not all of them require college educations, but all of them require some degree of experience. Experience can be gained in many ways, mostly by persistence. If an opportunity is not presented to you, it takes persistence (that exact same trait that makes it possible to obtain a PhD!) to seek out contacts and convince them to allow you to get the experience, even if you do so in your “free time” for no pay. This is how my husband changed his career path from a dead-end job and entered a career path that has him earning twice what I now earn. This is also how most successful business people have accomplished their success. The major skills that we fail to teach our children now have more to do with hard work, the ability to set and achieve goals, and the ability to recognize opportunity. It’s ridiculous to teach our children that if they go into massive debt early in life, that they are somehow owed a job for the education upon which they spent the money that they borrowed. That’s like saying that the farmer is owed rain just because he plowed and planted his field.