Higher Education

This platform has several complex facets that must be considered as part of an overall Higher Education perspective.

Part 1 – Tuition, Debt, and Funding

In the last 30+ years opposing forces have worked hard to both enable education while simultaneously cripple those people that receive it.  The irony here is that government is responsible for both sides.  In an effort to increase the level of education across the population, over the last few decades the US Government significantly increased its practice of subsidized and unsubsidized student lending.  This made school accessible to a much larger population base.  With this change in access to funding, and the resultant deferral of payback until at least 6 months post school completion, the higher education institutions did something that could be seen as almost criminal:  They significantly increased tuition prices.  To put this into perspective over a broader period:

  • From 1989 to 2016 college costs have increased at a rate 8x greater than wages
  • In 1963, average annual cost for tuition for a 4-year public college was $1,286 (not adjusted for inflation); today that same cost is $21,216.  It is significantly higher for private institutions.

There are mountains of other data metrics that reflect similar views of one simple fact:  Higher education remains a financially crippling burden on aspiring, current, and graduated students.  At the same time, expenses in most of these institutions, especially 4-year institutions, have skyrocketed to match inbound revenue increases.

The position on this is simple:  Student debt post-college is unacceptable to the level currently being experienced.  Our platform is that student loans must be completely interest-free, and the cost of that money lent will be paid by that institution, should it have a cost.  Additionally, schools must position costs on a per-class basis, using a scale that reflects wage applicability.  A flat cost per credit hour is no longer acceptable.  To be frank, a course in French Literature does not carry a wage applicability level that a course in Aerospace Engineering will carry.  Also, high-value courses cannot be increased in cost to “balance” this scale method; maximum costs per credit hour today must equate to top-end costs a school can charge for a class.  While this platform does appear to impact studies in areas such as the Humanities, a realistic view of educational practices, employable outcomes, and global competitiveness must also be factored into the conversation.

To also address existing debt and other financial considerations, we believe all existing student loan debt should also be refinanced as interest-free.  For current and upcoming students, we also support the position that the phenomenon of “out of state tuition” should be eliminated.  Tuition is a single line item, not a line item based on your residency. 

All of these moves have dramatic implications to collegiate funding.  The Moderate Majority encourages colleges and universities to expand their already lucrative private industry partnerships (hundred of examples of this exist across the nation) while also learning how to operate in a more cost-effective manner.

Part 2 – Tenure

Tenure in the US really came into wider acceptance in 1940, by the American Association of University Professors in a “Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure.”  Tenure rights have existed far longer, however, even in the K-12 grades.  Tenure has been tied to upholding academic freedom, and only allows those with it to be terminated for cause or extraordinary circumstances.  It has been a leverage in collective bargaining, and has compelled institutions to limit associate instructor contract durations, often forcing tenure to be granted.  While there are many arguments on why tenure is important, it also appears to be more of a unionized tactic, of sorts.  It also remains true that non-tenured instructors typically have higher teaching loads, lower compensation, little influence within the institution, few if any benefits, and little protection of academic freedom. 

Broadly speaking, educators are employed to perform any combination of three primary activities:  They instruct classes (lecturers), they conduct research, and they produce materials (authoring) in their fields of expertise.  Their employment expectations will outline the deliverables the institution will have in all, some, or any combination of those areas of emphasis.  Granting tenure, in far too many cases, effectively takes much of the deliverable pressure off those educators, and has been argued to “protect incompetent professors and teachers (in K-12)”.  Tenure has been seen by many as rewarding complacency, as tenured staff have less pressures to perform within their institution, knowing that it is difficult and quite expensive to terminate them.

On the opposite side of the debate, it has been argued that tenure protects those who’s views may run counter to the department, institution, or funding bodies.  In K-12 schools tenure also protects teachers from being fired for personal, political, or other non-work-related reasons: Tenure prohibits school districts from firing experienced teachers to hire less experienced, less expensive teachers as well as protects teachers from being fired for teaching unpopular, controversial, or otherwise challenged curricula such as evolutionary, theological, biology and controversial literature.  Therein lies part of the academic freedom conversation.

It should be noted that the blanket of “Academic Freedom” has led to teaching of what many believe to be extremist views that are, in fact, not realistic or conducive to the students’ long term success.  Far too many institutions have used tenure to actually promote teaching and opinions to students without the counterbalance of opposing views.

The pros and cons for tenure are certainly worthy of debate.  We take the position, however, that with any form of employment the performance is what should drive retention.  Accordingly, tenure should not be a component within any educational institution; considering the extremely diverse sets of scholars, opinions, and topics within the educational domain, diversity in all of those should be promoted by each institution.  Those educators and academics that are consistent in their ability to support, promote and instruct in manners that foster diversity should be retained; tenure is not needed to create or maintain that climate.

Part 3 – Preparing Our Youth

In recent years there has been increasing focus on costs of college education while at the same time we have seen a renewal of interest in Trades Education.  The Moderate Majority takes a more definitive stance in this platform by clearly advocating for a more aggressive plan to prepare our youth following their K-12 education sequence. 

We would like educators, counselors, and other school administrators to revisit and redevelop a far more aggressive and individually targeted set of tools that not only help but also encourage students to pursue not only completion of a high school diploma, but also a definitive plan following graduation that will prepare them for successful entry into the job market.  In essence, we believe the default expectation for every student should be to enter some form of career preparation following (and even before) graduation.  This is happening to a large extent today; we want more clarity in students’ options and how to embark on those paths.  We believe that guidance is not consistent across the nation’s school districts.

There are four key paths we would like to see as expected post-high school paths for students:

  1. Military enlistment:  Entering the US Military opens doors for thousands of career options and education, while also adding maturity, discipline, and leadership skills to those who wear the uniform.  The US Armed Forces offer opportunities unparalleled elsewhere in our society.
  2. Trades Education:  Training through vocational institutions and community colleges for 1-2 year programs in Trades is an excellent approach for many students to consider.  Many trades that are in high demand not only in the US but also around the world can offer wages and compensation packages that rival and often exceed those attained by 4-year college degrees.
  3. Associates Degree Programs:  The nation’s community colleges offer reasonably priced educations in many fields of study, including Nursing, Aviation, and other skilled fields that are quickly translated into strong career options.
  4. Bachelor’s degree Programs:  The 4-year college and university path has long been considered the most advantageous path for students that are prepared to enter and complete these extensive programs.  Deeper studies in sciences, for example, have produced outstanding graduates in many careers.  However, it should be noted that the majority of degrees offered by these colleges and universities are no longer as competitive in career placement and salary opportunities as those available through the three other path options previously listed.

*We would also advocate for the exploration of a 3-year Bachelor’s program, similar to those seen in other countries (e.g., Europe) for certain fields, including engineering and sciences.

Our position, therefore, is based on preparing our youth for their entrance into society as a prepared, employable contributor.  We believe a resetting of expectations from our youth is necessary to encourage far more of them (if not 99%) to move into one of the four listed post-graduation paths (other paths may also be identified) that set them up for success.  This will require a consistent focus in every school across the country, with individualized analysis for every student, and mentoring and guidance applied to all.

Additionally, we believe that public-private partnerships are key to the success in preparing our youth. One of the bigger challenges facing most collegiate and vocational institutions is placement of those students into jobs both during and following completion of their selected program.  We would like to see government-backed incentive programs that encourage businesses to sponsor our youth to a far greater extent than exists today, following patterns like we see in medical education, where internships, residencies, and eventual employment are available to all students.  Businesses should be motivated to help mold continuing generations of workers, while the students gain immeasurable experience.