So, is enrollment really down 10% at The University of Toledo this year?

Source?

The College of Arts and Sciences Blog?

All I see on that site are a bunch of anonymous posters making anonymous claims. That does not mean the posters are incorrect, but I would like to see some authoritative data. Also, since the semester does not technically start for a few days, anyone who is making enrollment predictions is a bit premature.

Although I recently left UT as an adjunct, I still have access to the MyUT system, and at least for classes in my former department things look pretty normal in terms of enrollment. One class I taught last year actually has a sizeable waitlist.

I think this "enrollment down" is just beginning of the change that is coming to education in general and to higher education in particular.

The idea of brick and motar education will recede with the new ways to become educated. The internet provides far more opportunities than ever in the history of mankind.

I have also read some things lately by James Altucher, who is a an op-ed guy who has shared some ideas about alternatives to college....

Here is one example of his posts....

http://www.jamesaltucher.com/2011/01/10-more-reasons-why-parents-should-not-send-their-kids-to-college/

I have no proof but I would not be surprised to see enrollment drop at TU. Tuition is out of control and the last few classes of graduates have had an awful time finding employment in their field. Or any field for that matter. And that student debt is always there over their heads.

Even so I would recommend college or community college for recent graduates. I did not go to school seriously till I was in my mid forties. T'was hard as I was a single parents and working full time. But I kept plugging away. And finally got a degree as I was about to retire.

The things I learned not only helped me in my employment but with living life in general. I am glad I stayed with school til the end.

ry, yes you are right, the plebeians will have to be content with automated "training" while the children of elites will continue to enjoy real education at small private colleges with real people teaching, and imparting education, ideas and thinking to them....I agree wholeheartedly that that is the way we are going, even though it makes me want to cry....that is what we are settling for....

jackie said: "Tuition is out of control..."

You seem to be unaware that UT - like other public universities in Ohio - faces a mandatory state cap on tuition increases, and the average over the past five years is something like three percent. The only things "out of control" are: a) state cuts to higher education; and b) university administrators cutting faculty and staff levels, especially in the humanities and social sciences, in light of declining state support.

30 years ago the state share of tuition was something like 65 percent of the total cost, while these days it is in the neighborhood of a 20 percent share. Those costs have been directly borne by the students (and indirectly by taxpayers subsidizing student loans). The state is giving conflicting directives; they want tuition capped, yet they almost continuously cut funding, so the net result is an overall gutting of public colleges and universities.

Wouldn't doubt it. My niece was going to start college at my alma mater this week. $21k when I went about a decade ago it was $2400 a year. That's a huge increase and not including room & board, supplies, food, living expenses, etc.

I was on campus last week and UT employees were all talking about a decrease in enrollment this year. If the trend continues, you will probably see some layoffs

historymike

I am aware of the massive cuts to education at the state level. When I started TU tuition was $90/semester and I paid out of city rates. When presidents of colleges make massive salaries and the professors have more students something is wrong with our higher educational system.

I am a big supporter of humanities and social services. These are the classes that help you become a well rounded person.

I believe we are on the way of pricing ourselves right out of higher education except for very wealthy. Students cannot continue to deficit fund their college costs.

According to an employee there I know, it is a contract year for all of UT's unions, so they'll be pushing any news that makes them look poor.

Don't know if there is a relationship, but the for profit colleges have pretty much all experienced an enrollment drop. Traditionally in bad economies enrollment rises as people hide out in education and wait for a recovery. With unemployment remaining high for an extended period the for profits say potential students are just plain out of money.

Hrrrrmmm:

Is there any information concerning how much the Government has been chipping in in terms of grants and financial aid the last 5-10 years compared to historical averages? Has this number escalated, perhaps as part of the stimulus? I am speaking in the dark here but I do find it difficult to understand how a family or student can pay for college tuition.

historymike- your chart ended at 2010. Go read any quarterly report of a for profit college for current info. Go ahead and start with Devry.

Sigh. Yes, Devry's numbers are abysmal, and so are Ashford's, and Phoenix has been underwhelming of late. However, this has more to do with problems like poor student outcomes and new federal regulations regarding student debt than a sea change in enrollment. Some of these for-profit companies went through a grow-at-any-cost mentality (more students equals more profit) and they would enroll anyone with a FAFSA and an admissions application.

However, the industry itself is not shrinking, and online education continues to grow. A significant amount of any decline reported by an individual school such as Devry can also be attributed to the fact that these new startup colleges and universities are starting to siphon off incoming students from each other. For example, I am sure that Ashford's accreditation woes sent thousands of students flocking elsewhere.

I don't know about 10%. What I heard was that 10% was a real conservative figure and that the real number was somewhere around 20%. And, by the way, who's going to publish that news? Not the university, that's for sure.

As a busy working adult who already has a Bachelor's degree, I'm glad that there are a variety of online options available for graduate education. I'd never be able to finish my Master's degree if I had to physically attend classes at a set time each week!

However, I still want my children to have the experience of going off to college for 4 (ok, probably 5) years after high school graduation. There are some things that the online experience can't replicate.

I need continuing Ed every year and with being on the road more than not, online choices are really all I have.

Madjack-Public institutions are rquired to publish information in the form of their annual report.
History Mike-spot on!

The non-profit/for profit school battle is complex, and historymike can probably weigh in more with what what I'm going to say.

Two main problems I see: traditional state and established private universities seem to feel (or felt--past tense) that they do not have to heavily market themselves (apart from sports merchandise) to get people to either come or realize what they offer. It really has been only in the last few years that I have noticed major, constant university campaigns from UT, BGSU, etc. However, if you watch daytime television, you are bombarded with ads for ITT Tech, Devry, "Become A Nurse/X-Ray Tech/Dental Assistant!" schools, etc. And then someone goes off and gets a degree that may or may not be worthwhile because of accreditation, opportunities offered, etc. But...the loudest voices get attention...especially when many of the for-profit schools (as noted) will take you if you have a GED, a beating heart and a FAFSA approved.

Second, traditional universities were extremely slow in creating online curriculum, either out of fear, unfamiliarity with the technology, feelings of inferiority, or all three put together. This gave the for-profits a major leg up in marketing to busy professionals...even better than going to school at night, you can now complete your degree at home, with the kids, regular dinner and family time, yada yada yada. Now, state and private universities are getting a little better (with both Business Administration and Communication programs leading the way), but there is still a...how do I put it..."degree mill" stigma associated with getting a degree online. Which is strange, considering schools like the University of London have been doing distance learning for over 100 years...this is just a newer version. I'm seriously looking into a couple of online MBA programs which will require that I be on campus rarely (and I can simply drive there).

Anyhow, my degrees are all from traditional state & private schools and my credentials are never questioned. I doubt the same is said about a DeVry/UoP graduate.

OHT:

1. Agreed that many public universities have been beaten at the marketing game by for-profit startups. I think some adminsitrators at traditional schools thought that the for-profit wave was a passing fad, but it is clear that for-profits are not going away. In one sense, though, public universities like UT and BGSU are rapidly becoming de facto for-profit commercial enterprises, and when the last drops of state support finally dry up, there may be moves to turn such institutions into full-fledged corporations. University of Toledo, Inc. and BGSU, LLC may not be far off.

2. Yes, there continues to be significant resistance to online education by traditional faculty, though this has somewhat diminshed in the past five years or so, at least according to national surveys. In my own experience some educators fully embrace the concept, while some are reluctant to change. Those who are reluctant to accept online education are often worried about the possibility of academic fraud ("how do you know who is really taking the test or writing the paper?") but the same can be said for face-to-face classes. In the large sections I have taught in face-to-face settings (some up to 250 students) I really have no way of knowing who exactly is in my class. At least in an online environment students have a unique ID and password for accessing their classes. In a large face-to-face class there is currently no efficient way to check the ID of students, though some interesting new technological systems are emerging where students can swipe ID cards before they take exams.

I have personally taught college for about eight years, and i have carved out an online teaching expertise in that time. Currently about 3/4 of my teaching load is online courses, and I enjoy teaching online classes, especially for the freedom it gives me in terms of scheduling. I can grade and develop course materials at any time in the 24-hour day, and if I happen to come down with influenza or something, I am not obligated to miserably slog through the workday like I would need to do in a face-to-face class. I just need to address any urgent emails and phone calls, and then crawl back to bed. Heck, I could even work from my bed if I were that sick that I could not get out of bed. I also like that I can take breaks during the workday and do some gardening or run errands. Of course, the downside is that my house is also my principal work space, so I have to develop clear time and space boundaries to keep from working 18 hours a day.

Madjack: universities are required to regularly report their enrollment figures, and the state pays much better attention to enrollment at state universities than it does, for example, to Toledo Public Schools.

Ba-da-boom.

Typically they announce semester enrollment figures a few weeks into the term. These numbers are audited and generally reliable, but it takes a few weeks to make sure all student financial aid and registration problems have been resolved.

I think it all falls in line with the broad frontal and rear assaults on all things public. It is a basic conflict that will probably be resolved with the dissolution of public education. The fundamental reasons, assumptions, and justifications for public education now seem either forgotten or irrelevant. Ipsofatso, we will probably return to the pre 1945 status quo where mostly only elites received quailty education.

The problem with your argument is that Public Universities do NOTHING to keep their cost in line. They raise their rates every year because they know your loose pockets Uncle Sam will just raise what you can borrow to cover their lack of cost control. They know a degree is now a pre-qualification for a decent paying job so they have you by the throat, so the rates can be whatever they want them to be. Why not raise rates when they know you the government will just let you sink yourself deeper in debt.

My wife and I both completed our first two years at community college because we didn't want a mountain of debt, and also because partying and the "student experience" wasn't our priority. Somehow she found her why to a MBA from a Big Ten school and I'm a skilled professional.

db I think if you read the posts you will see your points have already been addressed, especially by historymike.

Also, I wanted to just articulate a little more. I am not disagreeing with db, because the cost has gone up. It has gone up precisely because of less public support, but also a greater demand for services and responsibilities on the part of universities. When I went to UT, there was no advertising, no recruitment, no retention, no vast armada of support offices to support students and take them by their little hands and show them along and dry their tears. It was expected that you know what you wanted, could do it and figure it out and if you couldn't then you didn't. In all the years I was a student, there was no such thing as "free" printing, "free" hot dogs, hamburgers and dinners for family members and all kinds of eating courtesy of the university. After five years hard labor as an engineering student all I ever got was a glass of warm and watered down punch, but I did not complain. Nobody felt like paying extra for all of the fancy and unnecessary crap students demand and get now. Also, my mindset from back in those days tells me there is something wrong about public institutions spending money to try to advertise themselves. The goal used to be make the best education possible at an affordable price available at a public service. Now we are in competition to woo students with all kinds of gimmcracks that have nothing to do with education to make them more comfortable, content and happy regardless or not if they get a good education. On top of all of these services, of course, is a huge bureaucracy of administrators who come up with new "things" for students to "need." And don't even let me get started on athletics....anyway, there is just a huge chasm between what public higher ed was originally intended to be, what it has become, and what it is expect to do and be. By the way, did you really think all of those fancy commercials, radio spots, dinners for family members, whistles, flash lights, t-shirts, cups, key chains, hamburgers and hot dogs were really free? My point, is that those in charge of the legislation have forgotten the original purpose of higher education, that is to support the public good of providing affordable quality education, training, AND thinking to ordinary Americans. I don't see much sign that it is being reversed. So, no, I am not disagreeing with db, just pointing out the problem is much more complex and deeply rooted in the now very confused assumptions and rationales originally postulated for supporting higher-education from 1945 to 1980. It is simply not right to lay the blame on professors.

Typically they announce semester enrollment figures a few weeks into the term. These numbers are audited and generally reliable...

ah - HA! Generally reliable. Not just plain old 'reliable' but generally, meaning 'close enough for government work'. As for government audits, those auditors couldn't find a grow room in a greenhouse, much less a carefully adjusted generally reliable enrollment number.

Face it, HistoryMike. You're running out of students. Pretty soon you'll have to transfer to Home Ec. and teach the little darlings how to boil water, make pizza and open a beer bottle without benefit of a twist cap.

I, of course, am always available for guest lectures at a very reasonable rate.

Ipsofatso, we will probably return to the pre 1945 status quo where mostly only elites received quailty [quality - MJ] education.

That's cute. The topic is education, so you substitute ipsofatso for ipso facto, which is Latin and translates to 'by the fact itself'. What is even funnier is that my paternal grandfather, born around 1895, completed high school and his education included several years of Latin, which was mandatory during that period. He was an entrepreneur and so never went to college. My maternal grandfather, also born around the same time, came from very humble beginnings and did go to college. He was a chemist and knew how to set up and run an oil refinery.

The biggest contrast occurs in my mother's life. Mom was born in <redacted - mom is watching> and went to college at Toledo University during the WWII period, earning her baccalaureate. The interesting part is that mom worked all summer babysitting and doing odd jobs, and so earned enough money to pay for her college tuition and books for the rest of the year. Let's see you do that today.

Higher education has been pricing itself out of reach since the 1960s, and they do it because they can and because people are paying it. More money means higher salaries and bonuses for the staff. The students are borrowing huge amounts of money for their college education, and out of all the first-year-ever Freshmen coming into the university, I'm betting that less than half really understand that all this bread is going to have to be paid back and there are no guarantees that this brand new bad side of the bell curve Freshjock will be able to graduate or find a job once that graduation ceremony is over with.

I was quoting Archie Bunker. I really like him. He originally said, "ipsofatso." And mj, I am not necessarily disagreeing with you. All I am saying is that the problem is much more complex than most people, including the taxpayers and people in the legislature can get their heads around. Simply saying "higher education is pricing itself out of existence" is a vast oversimplification and the answer to it is "cut higher education!" Thoughtful and prudent cutting may not be bad, but what we typically get is wholesale axing without discrimination. AND since the administrators are in charge of the cutting, typically we get less faculty and less rank and file staff who really do things and instead get more administrators, who from what I can see just mostly meet together, eat, travel, think of new "things" the students want and need. and think of new ways to cut away from the people who really do the work, ---and they don't work cheap! Just my perspective. Bottom line is that just like every single problem in this country the basis is way oversimplified, so the oversimplified solutions end up causing more harm than good.

So scary...my heart goes to the patient and her family:

http://www.toledoblade.com/Medical/2012/08/22/UTMC-suspends-kidney-transplant-program.html

Many universities will either have to cut their tuition or layoff employees. It's the same type of thing we are seeing with various public sector unions.

Maybe elite institutioins still have some time. However, schools such as BGSU & UT, regarding total revenue, have probably reached a point which raising tuition will produce net negative results. If the 10% figure is accurate, they don't have enough parachutes for all the administrators and other six-figure employees to survive.

For-profit colleges such as DeVry are well-documented scams that are finally collapsing. I've read articles stating that for profit college are a trillion dollar scam.

"For-profit colleges such as DeVry are well-documented scams that are finally collapsing"

Oh, I don't know about collapsing. Here's a pretty good muckraking piece from the HuffPo regarding some of the current legal activity concerning these "schools":

Education Management Corp. Engages In 'Predatory Lending,' Whistleblower Claims

Another former recruiting manager has come forward with allegations that a prominent for-profit college chain routinely misled students about tuition costs and future job prospects.

The employee, a former associate director of admissions at Pittsburgh-based Education Management Corp., alleged a widespread scheme to boost federal student aid in a whistleblower lawsuit that was unsealed this week.

The suit compares Education Management, the nation's second-largest for-profit college corporation, to predatory lenders. The company is "motivated by profit rather than student success or rankings," and has "every incentive to maximize enrollment by recruiting unqualified students who will not be able to repay their loans," the suit says.

The case is the second pending whistleblower lawsuit against Education Management, which is partially owned by Goldman Sachs. The Justice Department last year intervened in a separate case brought by former employees who alleged the company doled out illegal bonuses and raises to college recruiters based entirely on the number of students they enrolled.

-------------

To your point about collapsing:

Two former employees of the University of Phoenix, the nation's largest for-profit college, filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the chain in 2003 that involved billions of federal student assistance dollars. The case was eventually settled with an agreement to pay the federal government $67 million in 2009, which amounts to about a fourth of the company's most recent quarterly income.

Unless my math is wrong, $67 million is 1/4 of the quarterly income (1/4 of the year). $67 million x 4 = $268 million x 4 = over $1 billion in income per year for University of Phoenix. That's not exactly collapsing.

Oh, you don't know about collapsing, eh? I've watched it the past couple years via the stocks of the involved companies.

You can look up other for-profit college stocks if you want further evidence, but here are two you mentioned.

http://ycharts.com/companies/DV

http://ycharts.com/companies/EDMC

Yes, they are collapsing.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trading-caps-and-gowns-for-mops-2012-08-22?link=MW_story_latest_news

If people are going to fork over big bucks or borrow six-figures for a degree, at least thoroughly research the job market.

Because an explosion of liberal arts degrees has flooded the job market. I had a conversation with a good friend of mine who is having real trouble with two of his children as he refused to pay the cost for a Music History degree or a English degree.

Too many kids think they are the next John Lennon instead of the next Orville Wright.

Too many kids think they are the next John Lennon instead of the next Orville Wright.

John Lennon hated school. What you need to become another John Lennon or Ernest Hemingway or Steve Jobs or Thomas Edison or J.K. Rowling or _____________, you most likely won't get at $20,000+ per year.

Didn't Jobs drop out of college?

I really love these kinds of discussions. You can argue either way and be right! On one hand, liberal arts are really the cradle and wellspring of creativity. They are really very important in coming up with new ideas and in forming critical thinking. CEOS say it is a problem these days finding people who really want to think instead of just apply some skill or learning they picked up. Also, it is the things of beauty such as art, music, historical shoes, drama, lovely surroundings and things such as those that we really enjoy.

But we do need people to actually perform services, make things, and do things. Both are important. Remember all college learning really began as liberal arts and than in itself grew out of the church. Things have become pretty twisted and perverted with so much specialization and the idea that we should just use our learning in order to amass more green stuff for our selves as individuals. The result is a lack of creativity, a lack of a willingness to give and share ideas to serve and bless others, and instead more reliance on greed, selfishness and raw power to exact what we want. Well, such things produce suffering and pain....but the good news is that those things produce the qualities and character that makes us reach out to.....liberal arts, faith, and spiritual things. So, out of this feudalistic, spiritually and humanly dark era, I believe something great will eventually come, that is if we haven't destroyed ourselves. In the meantime, enjoy sharing both with other people, whether you make things, do things, think, cook, clean, dig ditches...whatever you can do, do it with joy and dignity.

I had a conversation with a good friend of mine who is having real trouble with two of his children as he refused to pay the cost for a Music History degree or a English degree.

The 'em to get a minor in English, or whatever. Unless they're going to get a PhD and do research and teach, the purpose of a degree is to get a high(er) paying job with the diploma.

Too many kids think they are the next John Lennon instead of the next Orville Wright.

Okay, that's two people out of two billion, which are about the right odds for being the next John Lennon or Orville Wright.

Lennon was a talent that was going to be discovered no matter what. He'd never make it on an assembly line, which is pretty close to what was waiting for him given his performance in school. That or the dole, anyway.

Orville was an entrepreneur before he was anything else, and he was another sort that would be discovered one way or another.

And yes, Jobs did drop out of college after studying such things as art and calligraphy. Smart move, but he isn't the only one to have made it.

The so-called "explosion of liberal arts degrees" - a specious statement that itself begs to be dissected - should be applauded by every free market-obsessed, Wealth of Nations-worshiping, enthusiastic devotee of Adam Smith: colleges and universities offer these degrees because (get ready for this) the market demands them.

I would absolutely love to teach my favorite subjects every semester (such as early modern European expansion and epidemiological history) but only a handful of history majors would enroll. Therefore, such classes only get offered once in a while, and usually as special topics seminars.

However, my World War II class fills every...single...semester: spring, summer, and fall. It often goes on a waitlist, and one semester I had 20 students on the waitlist in a class for which I already overrode the enrollment cap. Now, do not misunderstand me: World War II is definitely a historical topic worthy of study, and I also enjoy teaching it, but the reason my department schedules the course is simple: the market demands it, and the university wants to meet that demand to increase revenue.

Anyone who decries a supposed excess of liberal arts degrees should hold a mirror up to American society: consumers want these degrees regardless of whether or not university administrators believe they are socially necessary or economically sustainable after graduation. This is free market economics at work here, and my eyes bug out when I hear a conservative defender of free markets whine about too many liberal arts degrees.

(sorry dbw8906: I am not trying to single you out. I hear this mantra frequently and it annoys me; my apologies in advance if this rubbed you the wrong way).

"......liberal arts are really the cradle and wellspring of creativity"

Think Leonardo da Vinci - artist but also an inventor

It saddens me that a Dad would refuse to pay for a liberal arts degree for an offspring. While I believe that a son or a daughter should most certainly work to contribute financially towards their higher education degree, I would never demean my kids choice of study in higher education by refusing to assist financially if I was able to pay. If they stay on target with their grades I'd pay what I could. I'd pay for a 2 yr. associates degree in whatever. I'd pay for barber or cosmotology training. They're your kids for Christ's sake. Be glad they want to achieve something. My kids had/have more value than just the amount of money they could possibly make.

IloveT - These Liberal Arts scholars from antiquity you speak of where often times Mitt Romneys of the world who where born into wealthy families and didn't have to worry about paying the rent next month. So it was nothing to spend decades pondering the "beautiful" sciences. The problem my friend is running into is he can't swallow the lump for college and then sponsor them for a decade till they also find their muse. He would like to retire at some point.

HM - Your right the market demands liberal arts classes because "math is hard" and free thinking is "fun". I loved my electives in liberal arts because compared to Bipolar Analog Integrated Circuit Design. I also understand the value of artistic points of view, creativity is found at the root of industry. There is no new electronic device for electrical engineers to fiddle with the spark of creativity to design it in the first place.

I'm just sick of whiny ass 20 something who complain they can't make fat bank off their French degree because teaching is too hard or they only thing their degree qualifies them for is a barista. If my children wanted me to pay for a liberal arts degree I would demand they minor in business, engineering, or accounting first.

A Liberal Arts Degree Doesn't Correlate With An Easier Life - Forbes

There is certainly value to how we educate ourselves, which poems we explicate, hearts we dissect, websites we build. The absurdity of a liberal arts degree, however, arises with the expectation that it entitles the bearer to an easier life. Odd that so many of us got the impression that having written fifty pages on Themes of Love and Beauty in Cave Paintings or The Impact of Geography on the Concept of Erosion would somehow set us up for a higher quality of life than the average American. These schools supposedly have career services offices. Instead of hiring a new Dean of Plurality or Sustainability Coordinator, colleges could use some of their endowment to lure students into visiting those offices before senior year.

That may be unfair to the many graduates who do think about their futures or who honestly believe that their obscure degree will lead to a job when every other person with that obscure degree will be vying for those same jobs. Many of us were indeed planning, we might have just gotten a little carried away with the idea that adult life could be as intellectually stimulating and sensually pleasing as our post-adolescent existence. Most people fall victim to runaway imaginations, but when you have a whole group of people with highly developed imaginations, the delusions can be startling.

We aren’t any closer because there may still be one piece of the adult puzzle that we are not identifying. Passions are not paths. Many of my friends found their passions in college. That’s why they treasure the experience. Of course, everyone wants to make a living out of what they love. No one wants to be disgruntled, but maybe we are setting ourselves up for just that by desiring to pursue interests that aren’t jobs. We spent so much money and time cultivating those interests. They would seem to be going to waste in a cubicle, but aren’t they going to waste in a coffee shop too?

The irony today is that a fresh college grad cant get a job with either a warm and fuzzy liberal arts degree OR a hard nosed business degree. They're both baristas.

Side note: Owens Community College Landscape and Turf Grass Management students usually have several positions from which to choose. True, many first jobs in that field are seasonal, but most of the businesses will keep the out standing ones busy through the off season. And the off season isn't that long - December, January and February.

I have never met a single horticulturalist that doesn't describe his/her work as a passion.

A couple of dbw's comments:

I'm just sick of whiny ass 20 something who complain they can't make fat bank off their French degree because teaching is too hard or they only thing their degree qualifies them for is a barista. If my children wanted me to pay for a liberal arts degree I would demand they minor in business, engineering, or accounting first.

Of course, everyone wants to make a living out of what they love.

1.) Any kid who thinks having a college degree is the magic ticket to wealth and luxury needs to have that balloon popped in three seconds. It is simply a leg on the stool...the other legs being things like business sense, drive, creativity, perception, etc.

Also, arts degrees need to have some follow up if you DO want the job with the higher-than-barista paycheck. You can major in a foreign language, but you better follow that up with something like an MBA or international relations. You can pursue that English degree, but make plans to head to law school or MA in communication/public relations.

2.) I'm a little biased because my degrees are communication degrees (hey, former radio guy). But, there's more to the story. I went to work for the radio station when I was 17--meaning I didn't have a degree, THEN go find a job. I WANTED to be in radio or television and I worked to make it happen. I worked all the way through college.

Also, I took a shitload of business classes as a minor. I think that is an excellent suggestion for any arts major. You need to understand how to value yourself, your talents, how to run your own business OR at the very least understand how the business you work for will make its decisions. Art galleries don't just run on sunshine and goodwill--they need to make money! These grads can think about "art" all they want and be passionate about it, but struggling for your "art" or "passion" makes no sense in a lot of cases--it's simply people who don't understand how to take that passion and turn it into making money. And that's where business classes--just basic ones--would actually help the "whiny" ones.

But no. In a lot of cases it's easier to be whiny...

Hold on here before we completely bash Liberal Arts degrees. ECON falls under liberal arts which produce in my opinion ideal business career candidates. The blend of rigorous quantitative mathematics and thought/theory/problem solving. Especially at a Graduate level! Your getting a hire that didn't self select out of difficult quantitative course work, but isn't a drone and can think.

I have 6 grandchildren either graduated from or in college right now. Three have debt hanging over their heads.

The only one with a tinker's chance in hell of repaying the loan is the med school graduate. And he is looking for a place to practice that will pay off his debt.

My granddaughter who went to law school is working in a bank. Her student loan payments are 1/3 of her total salary.

The last 2 in college have parents who can easily pay for their degrees. One is at UC Berkley and the other UNM.

All have or will have varied degrees, from medicine, engineering, BA, Liberal Arts, Teaching, etc. Most anything you learn in higher education makes you a better well rounded person. Will it get you a job in your field? Perhaps, perhaps not.

But as someone who graduated much much later in life I feel any education degree is to be valued.

I never found any warm and fuzzy liberal arts degrees or professors. I think one of my English professors started his first lecture with, "Some of you are under the delusion that I find your opinions interesting. I don't. Nor do I find your attempts at creativity new, insightful or breathtakingly beautiful. They aren't. You are here because, unlike the students in English 100, you are able to write your own name without prompting. You may rejoice in that. The other reason you're here is that your own name is about all you can write. I'm going to help you change that."

I found his attitude refreshing and stayed with the class. I have a thick skin in some ways, not so much in others, but what I often found in the artistic section of liberal arts were cliquish groups of insecure, slightly neurotic students who were developing abusive co-dependent relationships and substance abuse problems. None of them were quick to affirm anything about anyone who hadn't been dead for over 100 years, but all were very quick to criticize each other's work.

I gravitated towards liberal arts classes because I could write, and I know that my writing skill earned me a higher grade than the content of the essay. But warm and fuzzy? No, not so much. More like swimming with a bunch of barracuda.

The real problem is that when you come right down to it, when there isn't anything left but the whistle and the steam, if you don't get that sheepskin you'll end up working in a Mexican Restaurant for the rest of your life. Without a green card.

historymike - do you want to reconsider your stance on enrollment in higher education 8 months later now that BG, UT, and Owens also had terrible enrollment numbers for the last two semesters?

Americans have been significantly impacted over the last 5 years and if it wasn't for an increasing percentage of foreign students the numbers would be truly abysmal.

Thank goodness the economy has been turning just not enough to shrink unemployment rapidly enough.

http://www.ourtownperrysburg.com/Education/2013/04/02/Owens-to-lay-off-dozens-due-to-budget-shortfalls.html

http://www.sent-trib.com/front-page/bgsu-plans-to-cut-100-full-time-faculty-by-fall

http://www.toledoblade.com/Education/2013/01/24/Area-college-enrollment-losses-mild-expected-University-of-Toledo-suffers-biggest-drop.html

In 1997 I earned a bachelors degree in Business Administration - concentration Finance. This May I will graduate from Owens Community College with an Associates Degree in Applied Science - concentration Landscape and Turfgrass Management.

Which is more valuable? I'd say they are equally valuable. Of course you get more in depth knowledge in a 4 yr. degree. I loved college. I will say with some pride and some humility that I did really well.

But recently I've seen first hand that the two year degree gets students out into the job market and EMPLOYED. I've been impressed with how Owens has been able to target the curriculum to job placement. If you get a decent GPA you can get a decent entry level job in your field. If I had a youngster still at home deciding which to choose I'd have to tell them to get the two year, get working, then decide if you want to transfer credits and pursue the 4 yr. Unless you're a gifted student with scholarships and the desire for a masters and above its better not to go down the rabbit hole of debt without a good job market at hand.

I personally know students who went this route. One in particular comes to mind. She started with a two year at Owens and then went to work. While working she went to went to OSU for a bachelors and then her masters. It works.

MrGlass419: "historymike - do you want to reconsider your stance on enrollment in higher education 8 months later now that BG, UT, and Owens also had terrible enrollment numbers for the last two semesters?"

Uh, what "stance" would that be, MrGlass419? I have mentioned many times in the recent threads that college enrollment among traditional undergraduates straight from high school is expected to drop, especially in the Midwest. These are demographic changes after an earlier baby boom that has maxed out about 2010.

This is well known in higher education, and you will continue to see flat-to-falling undergraduate enrollment numbers the next five years or so. Some of this will be offset by gains in graduate education, some will be offset by returning adult students, but on the whole Rust Belt states are going to see some cannibalization between undergraduate institutions for traditional students. Colleges and universities that are slow to adapt will be especially hard hit, and if forced to predict, I would hazard a guess that UT will suffer the most, given its recent finanical woes. This will make it much more difficult to ride out tough enrollment times as compared to Owens, Lourdes, and BGSU, which are not saddled with any $35 million albatrosses.

If by "reconsidering my stance" you are suggesting that I am changing my opinion about the delusion some posters have about an "education bubble," then no. But if you wish to look at 2-3 semesters and predict that the sky is falling in terms of the end of higher education, be my guest: life is too short fr me to spend all day arguing with people whose minds are already made up.

Besides, I have a hundred papers to grade.

Personally, I don't see much appeal to UT. It's expensive, bu not very good and located in a pretty boring area. There are more exciting colleges with better post-grad prospects elsewhere. Really, why go to UT when there are better options elsewhere for the same price?

I thought UT to be a good institution. I'm very happy with the quality of education I received there. Its not always about location. The adult, working student who lives in town could give a crap about excitement. Its about drive time and getting to work, getting home, doing homework and getting up the next day to do it all over again. Party NOT.

Others here have better credentials than I to debunk the "better post grad prospects" comment.

I'm a U.T. grad. I haven't found my post-grad prospects lacking; however, it may be for my field. My U.T. degree also didn't keep me from post-grad studies at great schools.

I wouldn't put a label on U.T. as "lacking" for post-grad prospects. Right now, the economy and job-hunting is so messed up, people with name-brand super-school degrees are not finding life any easier.

I have no problem with my UT degrees – BS and MS. While I chose to work in a different field, I’ve don’t have a single friend who graduated with me not be able to find a job. As HM said, with demographics producing fewer high school grades, it looks to me like UT has been trying to change itself from commuter school to a residential campus and attract from a wider area.

My wife got her undergrad at U of T and then finished her MBA at U of M. Her only complaint of U of T is that some of the instructors seemed to have "already retired" and that the staff could use some new blood. She swore a couple of her instructors slept during class.

I earned three degrees at UT and I have had zero difficulty getting hired in a field (history) that currently has several thousand more PhDs than full-time positions. The average job search for a full time history position has between 50 and 200 applicants, and of the eight full-time jobs for which I have applied in the past five years, I was hired once, was a finalist three times, and at least got a call back the other four (I am leaving out of the equation two positions for which I am currently in the running but have not heard back from).

I have said it before, but it bears worth repeating: the harshest critics of any university are usually the people who work there and who live in the vicinity. There is a theory that could be developed suggesting an inverse relationship between proximity to a university and negative opinions of said university. A colleague of mine on the West Coast said that "University of Toledo" sounded "kind of exotic" to his coworkers when he mentioned he was giving a talk there.

A number of my friends from high school went to the University of Detroit (now UofD-Mercy). If you think UT's surroundings are sketchy, try hangng out at McNichols and Livernois after dark. Yet UD-M thrives, despite its less-than-deal location (yes, I know about Palmer Woods and Sherwood Forest).