Indiana is slashing higher ed degree programs
The verdict is in: The purpose of higher education is to get a job.
Indiana’s public universities, in response to a law recently passed, are slated to consolidate or cut more than 400 degree programs offered to students, from associate’s degrees to Ph.D. programs. The degree programs span the arts, education, and STEM, but the overall message is clear: If the degree does not satisfy economic needs, it’s worthy of being cut or consolidated.
Indiana’s governor, Mike Braun, expressed this sentiment most clearly: “During the most recent legislative session, one of our top agenda items included ensuring that Indiana’s higher education institutions are preparing students for career opportunities in the most in-demand fields of today and the future.” Eliminating degree options “will help students make more informed decisions about the degree they want to pursue and ensure there is a direct connection between the skills students are gaining through higher education and the skills they need most.”
If a foreign language degree does not meet the needs of an in-demand field, it ought to be cut. If a classical studies degree does not fill market needs, it ought to be eliminated. If a journalism degree does not meet the needs of an in-demand field, it ought to be cut. And so on and so forth.
Granted, demand is driving the decisions about which degree programs to eliminate or consolidate. As the law states, programs on the cutting board are those with low enrollment over the past three years: associate’s degree programs graduating an average of 10 students or less annually, bachelor’s degree programs graduating an average of 15 students or less, master’s programs graduating seven or less, and education specialist programs and doctorate programs graduating three or less. The thought process goes: if students aren’t enrolling in the programs then there isn’t a demand for them or the content they teach or the outcomes they produce, which makes them a fair contender for consolidation or elimination.
Students are, by and large, attending university with the intention of using their degree to get a job. They may plan to attend graduate school before hitting the job market, or they may choose a degree that isn’t tied to a specific career path, but nonetheless, they view the four-year degree as a ticket to successfully entering the job market. Therefore, it would seem, Governor Braun is just echoing the sentiments of students and their parents: The four-year degree ought to produce a job; if not, why enroll in it?
Attending college is expensive, and when something costs a lot of money, the consumer wants a good return on their investment. I get that. But the value of an education goes beyond one’s ability to get a well-paying job. The problem is, students aren’t receiving this message. When the highest office of a state says the purpose of enrolling in a higher education institution is to train for a job, it solidifies in the minds of would-be students and their parents that that’s why young people ought to attend, and, furthermore, that’s why they ought to choose a degree program that prepares them for a specific field of work.
The constant drumbeat of this message is at the expense of a young person’s education. They will miss out on all of the opportunities a university offers to learn how to think deeply and solve problems if they are solely focused on skill-building for a career. They will fail to see how a liberal arts degree can provide more value than a business degree, as a professor at my alma mater, Indiana University, once proclaimed.
During my undergraduate student orientation, a faculty member from the music school (which is a draw to Indiana University) stood up and made the case for choosing to major in French horn over business (another big draw to the university). Just like the business school, the music school has a rigorous program, and his argument was that the knowledge and disposition of a graduate of the music program would make them desirable to employers. In other words, majoring in French horn is unique and will stand out on a resume, and learning how to play one of the most difficult instruments well enough to center a four-year degree around it shows discipline and dedication.
Sitting in the auditorium, listening to this message, I could feel the tension rising among the parents of soon-to-be business school majors. Even then, attending college was an exercise in preparing for a career, which is why a liberal arts professor had to argue the market value of a music degree. But what students and their parents need to hear is that getting an education is about knowledge acquisition, learning to think deeply and well, and learning how to solve problems. A job is just a happy byproduct of a good education, and skill-building can coincide with an education, but ought not be thought of as superior to or more important than an education, or, worse, an education in and of itself.
I have no doubt that some schools in my home state, my alma mater included, have degree programs that are of poor quality and only arose because they were a pet project of some professor, not because they were a rigorous and worthwhile area of study. But I also know many professors who dedicate a great deal of time to ensuring that students really think deeply about a given subject and about the world around them—the professors who provide an education. I sympathize with them, but I guess the current career-readiness-above-all-else wave is just too strong to push back against sometimes.