The value of an associates degree

I attended my sister-in-law's high school graduation last week. She graduated from the same rural Utah high school as my wife - so rural that the entire county attends the same school, and can still only muster a graduating class of 38.

The commencement speaker, a marketing consultant flown in specially from California, was awful. He told a few good stories, but told them badly. The morals of his stories were only loosely tied to the narratives, and had no relevance to the students. Up in the cheap seats, we played a few thrilling rounds of "Quick, find a student that's paying attention." Sadly, nobody could muster enough points for a win.

But he said one thing that certainly stuck with me. It struck me right to the core. He stressed how impressed he was with what the students' had already achieved. He said many of the class had collected diplomas from another institution the previous week, and asked them to raise their hands. Eighteen raised their hands to indicate that they had earned associates degrees simultaneously with their high school diplomas. (Most of the rest had credits, too.)

Just under half the graduating class already had two-year degrees!? This is what an associate's degree is worth these days? This is the foundation on which the universities of the Great State of Utah will issue academic credentials?

It's horribly pedantic to have to say that the whole point of 'higher' education is that it is education beyond high school. Sure, talented students can complete college coursework while still enrolled in high school. The truly exceptional have been known to finish a 2- or 4-year degree far ahead of the usual schedule. But that's the exception. How many students could really do that? 5%? 10%? When 47% of the high school seniors in the entire county hold AAs, in what way can we justly call it higher education any more?*

Indeed, it is perfectly self-evident that if the average high school student can obtain a 2-year degree concurrent with a high school diploma, then the AA is worth no more than a high school diploma. And what is a high school diploma from a rural Utah high school worth? More than the sheepskin it's printed on, sure, but not much more. (Actually, more than most, because of the unique nature of rural Utah families, but still not enough to qualify the alumnus for more than unskilled labor.)

They were rolling out a similar system at my old high school during my senior year. By attending a special concurrent-enrollment English class, one could complete English 101 and 102, transferable to any state school. Why, my peers and I asked, should we take a challenging AP English class and, at the end, take an expensive test that we might pass, and which might be accepted for credit at our eventual institutions of matriculation, when we could take this concurrent-enrollment class and be assured of an easier class with an easier curriculum and a surety of college credit at the end?

I spent 13 years in the same suburban school district and had known many of my classmates since I was five or six. I knew every one of the 43 academically-advanced students in the class of '98. Only one opted for the concurrent enrollment program and its guaranteed college credit.

The rest of us, including three National Merit Scholars, all piled into a single classroom for AP English. The administration refused to split the section, and instead told the teacher to start out strong, to weed out the ones who weren't AP material. We did a unit on Crime & Punishment in two weeks. Only one student withdrew. The concurrent credit class never did anything by Dosteoevsky or any other Russian, and spent the same two weeks on 'getting to know you' activities and reviewing the syllabus.

At the end of the year, maybe a couple dozen of my classmates ponied up the bucks and took the AP test. The rest of us opted to complete our college courses in, well, college.

I guess the AP system is out of favor. Mediocre high school classes are called 'college level.' Associates degrees are worth no more than high school diplomas, and most bachelors degrees are worth no more than AAs used to be.

I'm proud of my sister-in-law. Although she did earn some college credits, she saw the program for the scam it was, and didn't chase after the spurious associates degrees. She wasn't one of the 18 to graduate from college the week before last, and she's the only member of the class going to college more than 60 miles from home.

--

*In truth, these days even community colleges and most lower-division university classrooms are just remedial education classes. I carry a favorite memory from English 102 at Glendale Community College. We were required to participate in 'peer editing.' I despise peer editing. I would try to make sense of some twit's 'essay.' In return, my essay would be 'edited' by someone with no fluency in the language.

My favorite was a narrative essay about a trip to a Rage Against the Machine concert at Compton Terrace. Of course it was two pages too short, and riddled with spelling errors, sentence fragments, and worse. The bulk of the final paragraph was about how friends had warned the author, a young *ahem* lady, about molestation and worse in the mosh pits of Rage concerts. She wrote about two close calls with sexual assault at the concert and then, without a shadow of a penumbra of a segue, closed with the glaringly-unsupported statement that it was the most uplifting experience of her life. Peer editing taught me nothing, save a shadow of a penumbra of compassion for English teachers.

Comments

[Kenneth Pike]

Ah, AP English... those were the days. I revisited Crime and Punishment in Philosophy 340: Dostoevsky and Nietzsche and found myself sorry we hadn't spent more time with Dostoevsky.

While your criticism is valid, if one would fix the problem, surely one must locate its source. Is this a problem with higher education, secondary education, public education...? Despite the ridiculous ease with which many "advanced" certificates can be obtained, I would suggest that securing a degree--any degree--remains more difficult than performing the jobs for which one thusly "qualifies." And the primary motivation for pursuing degrees is (I would argue, sadly) economic.

So what is the value of a degree? What is the purpose of education? If you value knowledge for its own sake, if you value enlightenment and clear thinking... you don't need a degree, let alone an advanced degree, though you might cherry-pick courses from a reputable university for your own personal advancement. But if you want the world to see you as "educated," either in your pursuit of employment or your pursuit of general influence, there is an obstacle course to negotiate and a piece of paper to hang on your wall.

I don't want to present a false dichotomy--I think a degree can at least potentially represent both an intellectual achievement and a prerequisite for employment. But corporate America in general rewards hoop-jumping, not intellect. Hoop-jumping is economically efficient, totally quantifiable and 100% institutionalized. And most people get degrees to get a job, not to make themselves better people.

I wonder if maybe you've answered your own complaint. In noting that the point of "higher" education is education beyond high school, you seem to view a necessary connection between an associate's degree and an associate's education. The market is driving a wedge between those concepts, and that creates dissonance in those who believe education should be more than merely preparatory to a vocation.

Thoughts?