College Unbound: The Future of Higher Education and What It Means for Students
College Unbound: The Future of Higher Education and What It Means for Students book cover

College Unbound: The Future of Higher Education and What It Means for Students

Hardcover – May 7, 2013

Price
$12.63
Format
Hardcover
Pages
256
Publisher
New Harvest
Publication Date
ISBN-13
978-0544027077
Dimensions
6 x 0.9 x 9 inches
Weight
1 pounds

Description

"Selingo envisions a fundamental shift in how degrees are awarded — not on the basis of credit hours completed but on competency demonstrated. The colleges that survive will be those, in Selingo’s words, that ‘prove their worth.’” — The New York Times Book Review "A compelling look at higher education. Selingo is critical, but he’s also encouraging. With so much time and money at stake, the issues he raises and the possibilities he explores are well worth your time." —The Washington Post "For a book about complicated policy and economic trends, this one is very well told. Selingo moves seamlessly from legal and regulatory decisions to the real experiences of students." —The Washington Monthly "This eye-opening book tells an important and overlooked story about how higher education in America has lost its way. This is a must-read for both policymakers and anyone struggling with the decision of choosing a college." — Geoffrey Canada, President and CEO of Harlem Children’s Zone "For parents and their children looking for quality education, this book provides invaluable assistance by taking a clear-eyed view on what matters: excellence in teaching, a first-rate learning environment, and a commitment to preparing students for the job market." — Jim Yong Kim, President of the World Bank Group "Part cultural critique, part trend-spotting, and part advice for students and parents navigating a flawed system. [ College (Un)bound ] delivers a powerful message to colleges themselves: the system is broken, and both their success as institutions and the future success of our workforce depends on their willingness to incorporate unbundled, lower-cost systems that allow students to customize their education." — Publishers Weekly , starred review "Parents should put College (Un)bound at the top of their lists…[it is an] indispensable guidebook to a rocky and shifting terrain." —The Plain Dealer "Once in a generation, a book forces us to reconsider the fundamentals of higher education—and College (Un)bound is that book for the Wireless Generation." — David L. Marcus, author of Acceptance "[An] eye-opening look at the state of higher education… College (Un)bound is a must-read for everyone interested in higher education and how technology will revolutionize it in the coming years." — Sebastian Thrun, founder of Udacity "Jeff Selingo is one of the most respected observers of American higher education. In College (Un)bound , he shares his in-depth observations of colleges and the environment in which we function. Not all will agree with his observations, conclusions, predictions and recommendations, but all will gain from this thoughtful, well-written, provocative volume. I highly recommend it." —David J. Skorton, President of Cornell University "You can wade through the shelf full of books on the changes coming to American colleges and universities–or you can read this one." — Mitch Daniels, President of Purdue University and former Governor of Indiana "America's higher ed system is at a crossroads today…Selingo introduces us to the students, teachers, and entrepreneurs who are rethinking our iconic vision of what college will mean for students in the next decade." — Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the Creative Class "Among the many books examining current changes in and challenges to higher education, College (Un)bound is both the most comprehensive and the most provocative." — Rebecca Chopp, President of Swarthmore College "Jeffrey Selingo combines solid data with compelling anecdotes to produce a richly textured account of the transformations taking place in American higher education today. By illustrating larger trends with stories about their impact on individual students and families, his book offers precisely the kind of student-centered approach that he is advocating." — Alison Byerly, president-elect, Lafayette College “[ College (Un)bound ] is a book that should be read by the parents of high school seniors, high school guidance counselors, university trustees, faculty and administrators; and most important—by potential college students themselves.” — Steve Trachtenberg, former president, George Washington University "A mixture of alarm and hope, wisdom and portending." — Kirkus Reviews Jeffrey J. Selingo is editor at large for the Chronicle of Higher Education, where he has worked in a variety of roles for more than fifteen years, including four years as the top editor. He frequently speaks before national higher-education groups and appears regularly on regional and national radio and television programs, including NPR, PBS, ABC, MSNBC, and CBS. His writing on higher education and technology has appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Huffington Post. The National Magazine Awards, Education Writers Association, Society of Professional Journalists, and the Associated Press have recognized him for his work. He is also a senior fellow at Education Sector, an independent education policy think tank. He previously worked for the Wilmington Star News in North Carolina, The Arizona Republic, the Ithaca Journal, and as an intern, for U.S. News & World Report, where he contributed to the magazine’s Best Colleges guide. He received his bachelor’s degree in journalism from Ithaca College and his master’s degree in government from Johns Hopkins University. He lives with his wife, Heather Salko, and two daughters, Hadley and Rory, in Washington, D.C. Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved. INTRODUCTION Bernardsville is an affluent village of nineteenth-century colonial homes, a small town center, and modern strip malls located in northern New Jersey, just thirty-five miles from midtown Manhattan. It’s the type of American bedroom community where the college-educated settle, start families, watch their children grow up on the town ball fields, and then send them off to college after graduation from Bernards High School.xa0xa0xa0With a rich selection of Advanced Placement courses and the exclusive two-year International Baccalaureate curriculum, the 750-student high school is often ranked among the best public schools in the state. In the fall of 2005, Samantha Dietz entered her senior year at Bernards. She was a member of the debate club, Harvard Model Congress, and worked for the student newspaper. She took Advanced Placement psychology, as well as several International Baccalaureate courses, including English, French, and environmental science. She maintained a 3.9 grade-point average. And like almost all of her senior class, she was bound for college the following fall.xa0xa0xa0Dietz would be the first in her family to go to college. Her parents had solid jobs in technology, despite having only high-school diplomas. They didn’t push her to go to college, but Dietz’s teachers and guidance counselors did, especially to four-year colleges. She applied to more than a half a dozen schools: Rutgers University, Drew University, Fairleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey; Hofstra University in New York; and Allegheny College and Bucknell University in Pennsylvania. She was accepted to all but Bucknell, where she was put on the wait list.xa0xa0xa0When decision time came in the spring, Dietz closely examined the financial-aid offers from each of the colleges. For her, the choice would be strictly about the bottom line. Fairleigh Dickinson offered her the most financial aid, nearly all of it in grants that wouldn’t have to be paid back. Its campus was about twenty minutes away, so she could live at home and save on room and board. With Fairleigh Dickinson’s financial package, Dietz’s tuition bill would be about half of the university’s $25,000 list price at the time. Her decision was easy.xa0xa0xa0What Dietz failed to examine was Fairleigh Dickinson’s graduation rate. In 2006, only 38 percent of its students graduated within six years, a rate well below all of the other schools she had considered. The two other local schools on her list, Rutgers and Drew, graduated more than 70 percent of their students within six years. Though Fairleigh Dickinson was giving Dietz a boatload of money, her chances of emerging at the other end with a degree were pretty dismal.xa0xa0xa0Dietz took a full slate of classes her first semester. To pay tuition, she waitressed and helped manage a restaurant near her house. She worked twenty-five hours a week, mostly on nights and weekends. “By Thanksgiving, I was exhausted. I had no down time,” she recalls. She was doing well in school, with mostly Bs in her classes. “I felt like I was killing myself for nothing,” Dietz says. “This was money I could be saving and starting my life. I was managing a restaurant, handling finances and employees. I was learning a lot less about the real world in school and paying so much for it.”xa0xa0xa0Toward the end of the semester, she received a letter from the university announcing that state funds to private colleges in New Jersey were at risk of being cut. It was a warning: she would likely need to pay even more the following fall.xa0xa0xa0So she dropped out of college. The Dropout Crisis The story of Samantha Dietz is not unique. It reflects a broad, national trend in American higher education, where some 400,000 students drop out every year.1xa0xa0xa0For most of the twentieth century, the United States bragged that it had the best colleges and universities in the worldu2009—u2009and rightfully so. Since the end of World War II, when colleges and universities threw open their doors to returning GIs, helping to create a vast middle class that defined a generation, these institutions have been the envy of the world and a symbol of American greatness. They attracted the most talented students from other countries, and graduated young Americans who were the best educated in the world.xa0xa0xa0Not anymore. Over the last thirty yearsu2009—u2009and particularly in the first decade of the new millenniumu2009—u2009American higher education has lost its way. At the very top, the most elite and prestigious institutions remain the bestu2009—u2009the world still clamors to get into Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Berkeley, Stanford, Amherst, Williams, and a few dozen other household brands.xa0xa0xa0But at the colleges and universities attended by most American students, costs are spiraling out of control and quality is declining just as increasing international competition demands that higher education be more productive and less expensive. Only slightly more than 50 percent of American students who enter college leave with a bachelor’s degree. Among wealthy countries, only Italy ranks lower. As a result, the United States is now ranked number twelve among developed nations in higher-education attainment by its young people.2 As the baby boomer generation leaves the work force, the country risks having successive generations less educated than the ones that preceded them for the first time.xa0xa0xa0Such trends carry significant economic risks for the United States. For every dollar earned by college graduates, those who drop out without a degree earn sixty-seven cents. Since the turn of the century, average wages for high-school graduatesu2009—u2009who today make up about half of the adult populationu2009—u2009have fallen considerably to just over $19,000, below the federal poverty level for a family of four. Nothing short of winning the lottery helps ensure a young person will achieve the American dream quite like a college degree. A four-year college credential is the best ticketu2009—u2009and perhaps the only ticketu2009—u2009for kids from the poorest families to get ahead. For children from families at higher income levels (defined as $61,000 and above), a degree helps them make it to the top themselves. xa0 In 2010, four years after Dietz quit Fairleigh Dickinson, she signed up for a class at nearby Raritan Valley Community College. Since then, she has taken one class a semester, paying about $500 a course. She wishes her counselors in high school had encouraged her to consider community college, instead of mocking two-year institutions as places for students who couldn’t hack it on a four-year campus.xa0xa0xa0Now, Dietz is twenty-four years old and working for a real estate company. Her job doesn’t require a degree, but she thinks she’ll eventually get one. She has heard the statistics on the long-term payoff of a degree, but for the moment Dietz feels she is better off than many of her high-school friends who went to college. “They graduated and are in worse situations,” she says. “They are back to waitressing or nannying, not doing anything with their degree. They are living at home and in tons of debt. I’m in a much better situation.” A Risk-Averse, Self-Satisfied Industry American higher education is broken.xa0xa0xa0Like another American iconu2009—u2009the auto industry in Detroitu2009—u2009the higher-education industry is beset by hubris, opposition to change, and resistance to accountability. Even the leaders of colleges and universities think we’re in trouble. More than one-third of them say American higher education is headed in the wrong direction.3xa0xa0xa0In 2006, in its final report from a year-long study, a federal commission studying the future of higher education warned of the dangers of complacency. “What we have learned over the last year makes clear that American higher education has become what, in the business world, would be called a mature enterprise: increasingly risk-averse, at times self-satisfied, and unduly expensive,” it said. “History is littered with examples of industries that, at their peril, failed to respond tou2009—u2009or even to noticeu2009—u2009changes in the world around them, from railroads to steel manufacturers.”4xa0xa0xa0Change comes very slowly to higher education. Many institutions in the United States were established over two centuries ago, with a handful dating back to the days before the American Revolution. Tradition is important at these colleges. A confluence of eventsu2009—u2009flagging state support for public colleges, huge federal budget deficits, and falling household incomeu2009—u2009now makes it necessary to consider new approaches.xa0xa0xa0Ideas for change are everywhere. Almost every day a report about innovation in higher education or an invitation to a meeting about its future lands on my desk. In April 2012, I made my way to one of the largest of those gatherings, the Education Innovation Summit at Arizona State University.xa0xa0xa0The summit was notable for who wasn’t there. As I scanned the name tags of the 800 or so attendees, I found very few were actual educatorsu2009—u2009the college presidents, professors, or others who spend their days on campuses immersed in the business of higher education.xa0xa0xa0This gathering at an office park for start-ups run by Arizona State had attracted educational entrepreneurs, CEOs, and investors to hear talks about the future of education and see demonstrations from more than a hundred companies promising to bring massive change to the tradition-bound industry.xa0xa0xa0Kicking off the meeting with a call to arms was Michael Crow, the hard-charging leader who, in his ten years as president, had transformed Arizona State from a sleepy public university to a test bed for new ideas. Lecturing the group on what ails higher education, he summed up its problems in a word most of us had never heardu2009—u2009filiopietism. Translation: higher education is clinging to tradition. Too few students are going to college, not enough are graduating, and the whole thing costs too much. Quoting his father, a US Navy sailor, Crow called this a “piss-poor performance.”xa0xa0xa0Although Crow is derided in some academic circles for his business-like approach to higher education, he found a sympathetic audience in this gathering. For this crowd, lacking an academic pedigree is exactly what’s needed to reform the outdated methods of traditional colleges, and of course, profit at the same time. Investors are lining up to cash in on the college of tomorrow. Venture capitalists poured some $429 million into education companies in 2011. That same year, in the midst of a worldwide economic slump, 124 education start-ups received financial backing, the most since 1999 during the height of the dot-com boom.xa0xa0xa0The new business ideas that are changing higher education range from rethinking how high-school students apply to college (think Facebook, with colleges making friend requests to prospective applicants), to how courses are delivered (150,000 students in an online class), to how learners are certified (think of a badge like those given in the Boy Scouts, instead of a diploma). Each new idea raises the anxiety level of administrators on traditional college campuses that have had a monopoly on the credential market and want to maintain it.xa0xa0xa0In other industries, “those who don’t innovate go out of business,” Jennifer Fremont-Smith tells me under the ninety-degree Scottsdale sun during a break in the program. She is cofounder of Smarterer, a Boston-based start-up that offers technology for validating technical skills on everything from social media to Microsoft Office programs. “Higher ed,” she adds, “shouldn’t be different.”xa0xa0xa0Despite the technological advances of the past two decades, the revolution in the way college education is delivered is just beginning. For the most part, the residential college experience of today is much like it was ten or twenty years agou2009—u2009the classrooms, dorms, dining halls, and quad. Though laptops and iPads are ubiquitous in lecture halls, students can take classes online, the dining halls have sushi, and nearly everyone has a smartphone, the basics of going to college and getting a broad education or training in a profession remain largely unchanged.xa0xa0xa0At least for now.xa0xa0xa0A college has many purposes, from research and discovery to maturing students. At its core, one of the purposes is information delivery, and in recent years other long-established content providers from music to journalism to books have been transformed by technology, resulting in the decline of the middlemanu2009—u2009record stores, newspapers, bookstores, and publishers. Are colleges next? Talk of a coming disruption to the traditional college model has reached a fever pitch in some corners of higher educationu2009—u2009each day seems to bring news of innovations with the potential to transform how we get a college degree, just as iTunes forever changed how we buy music.xa0xa0xa0If every revolution has a turning point, perhaps that defining moment came for higher education in the fall of 2011. A Stanford professor, Sebastian Thrun, and Google’s Director of Research, Peter Norvig, offered their graduate-level artificial intelligence course online for free. They thought the class might appeal to 500 students, perhaps a thousand. It ended up attracting 160,000 students from 190 countries, prompting the label “Massive Online Open Course,” or MOOC. The 22,000 students who finished received an official “Statement of Accomplishment.” Thrun then asked the top thousand students who had perfect or near-perfect scores on their assignments to send him their résumés. He promised to pass the best ones on to tech companies throughout Silicon Valley. After the course ended, Thrun turned his focus to a company he started, Udacity, which offers low-cost, online classes.xa0xa0xa0The success of the Stanford class touched off a string of announcements in the following months by MIT, the University of California at Berkeley, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Michigan, Princeton University, and dozens of others that they would attempt to deliver a piece of their brand-name education to the masses online. At the same time, new ideas to substantially lower the cost of a traditional college degree were emerging. The most notable effort was at the University of North Texas. There leaders called in the management consulting firm, Bain & Company, famous for helping corporate America restructure its operations, to assist the university in designing the college of the future for its branch campus in Dallas. The model shaped by Bain called for a limited number of majors tied to the needs of the local economy (such as business and information technology), classes offered year-round, and hybrid courses (a combination of online and face-to-face classes). For students who graduate on time, a bachelor’s degree would cost about $18,000.xa0xa0xa0The new University of North Texas campus and massive online courses like Thrun’s are precisely the type of disruptive forces that Clay Christensen envisions displacing traditional players in higher education. Christensen, a Harvard Business School professor, is the father of the disruptive innovation theory that argues that the most original new products take root at the bottom of the market and eventually move up market, displacing established competitors. Think of cell phones replacing landlines and digital cameras replacing film. Christensen has written several best-selling books on the theory. He believes higher education is the next industry ripe for this kind of change, and in 2011 he laid out his arguments in the book The Innovative University . I met him that summer at a day-long seminar he held for those leading change in higher education. “We need new models because the cost of higher ed is becoming prohibitive,” he told me. “The history of innovation tells us those new models are not going to come from within higher ed. They will come from new entrants.”xa0xa0xa0As a reporter, I’ve heard plenty of people over the years make similar sweeping statements about coming change, only to see nothing happen. In each decade since the 1970s, the end of higher education as we know it has been predicted, usually during a deep recession that made people question the need for college. In 1976, Newsweek magazine ran a famous cover of two college graduates donning their cap and gown while holding a shovel and jackhammer. The headline: “Who Needs College?”xa0xa0xa0Of course, those predictions now seem greatly exaggerated, furnishing current college leaders with an abundance of overconfidence. The truth about change is that we tend to overestimate its speed while underestimating its reach.xa0xa0xa0This moment in higher education is ripe for change. States have increasingly rolled back their financial support for higher education, leaving their public universities, which already educate eight in ten Americans, scrambling for cash at a time when more students are trying to get in. By some measures, state taxpayer support for higher education hasn’t been this low since 1965, when there were fourteen million fewer students in the system.5 Over all, student debt has surpassed trillion dollars while, since the late 1970s, the annual costs at four-year colleges have risen three times faster than the rate of inflation. Some $110 billion in student loans was borrowed in 2011 alone. Some 50 million Americans now hold some kind of student loan, slightly more than the number of people on Medicare and almost as many as receive Social Security benefits.xa0xa0xa0The massive run-up in student-loan debt has raised plenty of comparisons to the bubbles of the last fifteen years in tech stocks and housing prices. Could higher education be the next bubble to burst? Some economists dismiss this idea, pointing out that a college degree is not an asset like a house or a stock, which can be flipped and will lose value if people can’t or don’t want to buy it on resale. Still, a kind of bubble could exist if students overvalue degrees from some collegesu2009—u2009and I believe this is already happening. The worth of a degree is often measured by the salary a graduate receives, especially when they come from elite colleges and go on to lucrative employment at Wall Street banks and consulting firms. But these kinds of employers recruit only at top colleges. The question remains: is a degree from Podunk U worth $50,000 a year? Even if you go $30,000 or $40,000 into debt to get a diploma and then have trouble getting a good job?xa0xa0xa0Heavy debt burdens for recent college graduates might make good news stories, but they rarely generate more than a collective sigh from the public and politicians who largely see a college education as a private good paid for by the person who benefits from it most, the graduate. As one state lawmaker told me when I asked him if he worried that the average debt of graduates in his state had hit the $25,000 mark, “So what? That’s the price of a new car.” Under the hood of that new shiny car are societal shifts causing a growing divide between the haves and have-nots in higher education. The wealthiest colleges are spending ten thousand dollars more per student on instruction than less affluent schools that dedicate about as much money to their students as high schools do. Even as more of our citizens need an education past high school, elite colleges are making themselves even more exclusive, proudly boasting each spring about the smaller and smaller percentage of applicants they have accepted (in 2012, Harvard rejected nine in ten applicants, including at least 1,800 high-school valedictorians).6 At the 200 colleges that are most difficult to get into, only 15 percent of entering students in 2010 came from families in the bottom half of incomes in the US (under $65,000). Nearly seven in ten students on those campuses come from the top income group (above $108,000).7xa0xa0xa0The result is that the US higher-education system is becoming less of a meritocracy. In the last decade, the percentage of students from families at the highest income levels who got a bachelor’s degree has grown to 82 percent, while for those at the bottom it has fallen to just 8 percent. No Longer a One-Size-Fits-All Experience Eighteen years ago, just as the Internet was taking off, I graduated from Ithaca College, a traditional, residential college with 6,000 students (I didn’t have an e-mail address until my sophomore year). Sixteen years from now, my youngest daughter will go to college, and I can only imagine what her experience might be like. One of the reasons I decided to write this book is to help students better understand the various pathways to a degree and also to assist parents like me sort through the hype and the reality about the future of higher education.xa0xa0xa0Unlike the disciples of Clay Christensenu2009—u2009the “disrupters” as they are knownu2009—u2009I don’t believe that scores of colleges will simply disappear in the future and be replaced by online imitations. Sure, by my estimates only 500 or so of the 4,000-plus colleges and universities in the United States are truly safe because they have stable finances or large endowments.Unlike newspapers and bookstores, colleges are mostly protected from market forces by large government subsidies and a complex regulatory environment that does not allow your or I to simply start a new college from our bedroom like we can a Web site that puts a newspaper out of business. Although as many as a thousand colleges are at risk of closing or merging in the decade ahead because of poor finances, the vast majority of colleges will adapt. Colleges are like cities, as so many people have reminded me throughout the research for this book. They evolve as needs change, although many of them will struggle through this next evolution.xa0xa0xa0If you’re a parent who went to college, don’t assume your children will follow the same route. Technology has given students so many more choices about how and where to get a college credential. One difficulty I’ve encountered is that we no longer have a shared vision in this country about what a college education should consist of. Even college students today can’t be described in a single way. The people we think of as traditional college students, eighteen- to twenty-four-year-olds, make up a little more than a third of enrollments at colleges across the country. These students have different interests and learning styles from each other, so for some a four-year liberal-arts college is best, while for working adults an online degree is often the better option.xa0xa0xa0We think of American higher education as a cohesive system, but there is nothing uniform about it. Colleges and universities provide a wide variety of educational and social services and bring them together in one package, which usually is delivered at one physical location. That system is collapsing under an unsustainable financial model.xa0xa0xa0In its place is emerging a collection of providers. In the face of these new competitors, a portion of traditional higher education is trying to remake its model. One of the most significant efforts we’ll visit is at Carnegie Mellon University, where professors in specific academic subjects and researchers versed in the science of how students learn have teamed up to build elaborate online courses that are already reshaping how content is delivered in college and university classrooms.xa0xa0xa0The technological revolution in how information is distributed and consumed holds the promise to scale higher education to serve more students and cut costs. At the same time, the rush to embrace technology as a solution to every problem has created tension on campuses over whether the critical role higher education plays in preparing the whole person to be a productive citizen in a democratic society is at risk. Indeed, in an increasingly complex world, the foundation of learningu2009—u2009a liberal-arts educationu2009—u2009is more important than ever. Read more

Features & Highlights

  • What is the value of a college degree?
  • The four-year college experience is as American as apple pie. So is the belief that education offers a ticket to a better life. But with student-loan debt surpassing the $1 trillion mark and unemployment on the rise, people are beginning to question that value. Is a college diploma still worth pursuing at
  • any price?
  • In
  • College (Un)bound
  • , Jeffrey J. Selingo, editor at large for
  • The Chronicle for Higher Education
  • , argues that America’s higher education system is broken. The great credential race has turned universities into big business and fostered an environment where middle tier colleges can command elite university-level tuition while concealing staggeringly low graduation rates and churning out students with few hard skills into the job market.
  • Selingo not only turns a critical eye to the current state of affairs in higher education, but he also predicts how technology will transform it for the better. Free massive online open courses (MOOCs) and hybrid classes, adaptive learning software, and the unbundling of traditional degree credits will increase access to high quality education regardless of budget or location and tailor lesson plans to individual needs. One thing is certain—the Class of 2020 will have a radically different college experience than their parents.
  • Incisive, urgent, and controversial,
  • College (Un)bound
  • is a must-read for prospective students, parents, and anyone concerned with the future of American higher education.

Customer Reviews

Rating Breakdown

★★★★★
30%
(128)
★★★★
25%
(106)
★★★
15%
(64)
★★
7%
(30)
23%
(97)

Most Helpful Reviews

✓ Verified Purchase

A (perhaps unrealistically) rosy view of the future of higher education

I am a former college professor who left academia a year ago, in large part because I did not care for the trends I was seeing in higher education. So when I had the opportunity to review this book, I was eager to do so, especially given the background and expertise of the author, Jeffrey Selingo, who is the Editor at Large of the The Chronicle of Higher Education. I was hoping to find a balanced and nuanced review of the changes taking place in colleges today. Instead, this book--other than the obligatory criticisms of the high tuitions and large debt loads families are assuming these days to put their children through college--presents a largely glowing portrait of where college is heading.

Take, for example, the topic of online classes, which occupies a large part of Selingo's book. This is a hot trend in colleges today for two main reasons: Colleges make a bucketload of money off them, and students love them. Selingo obviously loves them, too, and he waxes eloquently at great length about their promise for delivering convenient and inexpensive courses to students. He notes on p.99 that "a vocal slice of professors and administrators remain skeptical" of online classes, even though "every new study of online learning" arrives at essentially the same conclusion that students perform better in online courses that traditional courses. This is only one small example of sweeping statements that Selingo makes without offering any supporting evidence, and it seriously distorts the actual state of the pedagogical research, because it is emphatically NOT true that every study supports the superiority, or even equality, of online classes compared to traditional classes. For example, the Community College Research Center at Columbia University has produced multiple studies showing that community college students who enroll in online courses are much more likely to fail or drop out compared to traditional classes. Another study following over 50,000 students in Washington found that students who took more online courses were less like to transfer to four year colleges or obtain degrees.

This research is not mentioned in Selingo's book, nor does he address the issue of cheating on online classes. While there are steps that instructors can take to ensure that students do the work themselves and don't cheat on online tests, these involve considerable effort on the part of the instructor (e.g., setting up webcam surveillance of the student while she/he is taking the test, or arranging for a proctored exam to be administered), and few instructors or faculty are inclined to do so. It is entirely possible for students to receive credit for online courses where they did none of the work (google "we take your class for you" for an eye-opening display of companies openly advertising to cheat on online classes). Of course, cheating takes place in traditional classes. The difference is that the online setting makes it easier to do so.

Another disturbing aspect to the increase in online courses is that, too often, they are less rigorous than traditional classes. This is, in fact, a major reason so many students like online courses so much: They often require much less time and effort than a traditional course. I've had students tell me that they've completed an online course in two days, by going straight to the quizzes and searching the readings/lectures for key terms in the questions.

It is possible to design an online course that is rigorous, not susceptible to cheating, and offers the same intellectual challenge and exchange of ideas with faculty and peers that you can find in a traditional classroom. But such course are the exception, not the norm. And the enthusiastic endorsement of the online revolution without acknowledging these weaknesses is, in my opinion, a major flaw of the book.

The future of higher education, as Selingo sees it, is a system where students receive a more customized and flexible experience, with most students obtaining a degree through some combination of online courses, credentials offered for completing MOOCs or other "life experience," transfers across institutions, and internships. While I agree with the author that such a system would likely result in a larger number of students receiving an undergraduate degree, I don't agree that this is a future to be desired. On p. 24 the author argues that there has been a "systematic dumbing down of college campuses" and that "while the price of a degree is increasing, the amount of learning needed to get that piece of paper is moving in the opposite direction." I agree with this sentiment strongly, actually, but I also don't see the solutions embraced by Selingo as improving matters any.

That being said, the author writes well, and he does an excellent job of capturing the changing face of higher education. In particular, the first section of his book ("How We Got Here") is an excellent if disturbing summary of where higher education has gone wrong in recent decades. I just wish that the rest of the book had taken a more critical and balanced look at the unintended consequences and disadvantages of the changes he endorses so enthusiastically.
319 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Some good points, but mostly weak, unfocused arguments - 2.5 stars

"The typical state university or research institution is the amalgamation of three different business models: a consulting firm that offers solutions (the university's research function), a manufacturer that adds value to a raw material (the teaching function), and an online auction site that facilitates networks (the life and career function)."
--Jeffrey Selingo, COLLEGE UNBOUND, p. 68

So Jeffrey Selingo is telling us that students are "raw materials" which gain value through the production process of "manufacturers" so that the finished product can be "auctioned" to employers as purchasers. If you can get your head around this conceptualization of education, you will be well on your way to understanding Selingo's argument (disjointed though it may be) in this book.

Higher education is, according to Selingo, broken. The whole system needs to be revamped from nearly the top (excluding the "elite" institutions, that is) to the bottom. And Selingo has been hanging out with just the educational entrepreneurs to do the job. If it's new-fangled and glossy and sizzling, Selingo is all for it. Everything else is just a relic of the entrenched status quo of universities stuck in their "traditional" methods which no longer serve the needs of twenty-first century students. Having heard most of these same market-based, "reform" arguments made about K-12 education, I'm already on my guard.

There are so many problems with higher education that I hardly know where to start, but one of the biggest problems Selingo seems to have is the "bundling" of services at colleges. Colleges offer not only a fairly set curriculum in terms of general and major-specific courses (offered by their own institution) in order for students to be eligible for graduation, but college also seems to come as a canned experience - the dorm life, the food service, campus facilities and amenities such as athletic facilities with lazy rivers. All these extras come bundled together and that's what's driving the cost of higher education. Colleges compete in part by offering luxury residential facilities and other amenities, but they cover the costs through borrowing which gets added on to tuition and students have little or no idea what they're really paying for. Moreover, colleges are enticing students to come to their schools without disclosing the real important factors such as graduation rates and average debt loads. Many students end up not graduating and many more end up graduating with an unusable degree, and in either case they end up carrying more debt than they are able to pay off when they find themselves un- or underemployed.

If this seems like a long and rather unfocused list of grievances, it's because that's how Selingo presents his arguments. Moreover, he often claims, but rarely demonstrates, that the problems are significantly worse today than they were ten or twenty or fifty years ago. Have drop-out rates and transfer rates significantly increased over the past generation or so? Are colleges really offering more frills? I graduated in 1992, and much of what Selingo describes seem pretty familiar to me. Are students really significantly less prepared for the work world upon graduation? Seems to me the problem is simply that there is no work available.

Selingo is very captivated by solutions involving technology (especially if recommended by his favorite consulting company, Bain & Company). He is very enthusiastic about online classes, especially massive open online courses (MOOCs) and free internet based video programs such as the Khan Academy and the MIT library of course offerings. He things that colleges need to be prepared to unbundle their programs and accept (or offer) credits from any number of different sources (including life experience), but he's a little vague about the process of how those credits would be evaluated, approved and accredited to make a meaningful degree.

Selingo is also confusing technology as a tool with technology as content. He often views education as a process of pouring information into students, which can, he argues, be done just as effectively (not to mention more cheaply) online with 100,000+ students as in person with a few hundred students. He seems very focused on large lecture classes as the point of departure. But education is about a lot more than just filling students with information (as Selingo himself acknowledges in some seemingly contradictory passages), and the most valuable college courses are usually small, active participation discussion courses. Education is more about learning how to learn and having your ideas challenged by others and having to defend them, learning how to think critically and persuasively present your ideas, learning to interact with others, exploring your own interest and passions, stumbling onto new ideas and pursuits, networking and other similar inter- and intrapersonal skills. Most of the latter goals are not well suited to the online experience. Students don't learn in a vacuum. They learn in the context of relationships with peers, professors and mentors, all of whom are flawed human beings. The drawbacks to traditional education, as Selingo paints them, are often features rather than bugs. Real life is messy - there's no reason why college shouldn't be.

I'm also skeptical of Selingo's claim that in the information age, professors are no longer the "experts" in their fields. Students do have a wider range of information much more readily available, but professors, who spend their lives exploring, reading about and debating particular issues are in a much better position than students to understand the material and sort out credible facts from myth and misconception. I don't think professors will - or should - be demoted to coaches anytime soon.

I question to what extent many of the problems Selingo presents are truly problems or whether it's just the nature of higher education, and I question how much has really changed over time. Much of what he writes has a sort of, "in my day" tone to it which suggests that Selingo may be misremembering what his day was really like (his day being more recent than mine). Also, the "entrepreneurs" that Selingo is so taken with have a vested interest in seeing "problems" with higher education specifically so that they can fill "needs" and solve those very "problems" to their own profit. I'm not as familiar with the world of higher education, but we see it all the time in K-12, in which educational companies are constantly producing new curricula, standards and testing, all of which seem to show that students today are "failing", especially in international competition despite the fact that scores on the NEAP, the gold standard of testing, have been steadily rising for decades and, when controlled for poverty, the U.S. still ranks near the top on all educational measures. But success isn't as profitable as failure.

To the extent there are problems with higher education, I think they fall in basically one of two categories. The first has to do with the nature of young adults whose brains are not fully formed and who have very little exposure to or understanding of the real world or conception of what they want to do in it. Expecting people at this age to go into higher education with a career and financial goals in mind is a fool's errand (much moreso channeling eighth graders into a career academy/community college as Selingo advocates at one point). Online programs and computer software can help give students valuable data points, but the thought of computers tracking and channeling students educational and career choices from early ages is rather Orwellian, not to mention even the Chinese are moving away from such systems. We do need, as Selingo himself argues at times, to develop a college system that is more flexible and adaptive to the developmental needs of immature young people. But this needs to happen more in the form of human contact than electronic monitoring.

The other big category of problems in higher education is, indeed, as Selingo argues, the price tag and the resulting debt. I think Selingo is on target when he talks about the need for students and their families to consider - and universities to disclose - issues such as graduation rates and debt loads, especially the relationship of those factors to the financial value of the degree.

But the biggest driver of college costs to students and families has been the dramatic reduction of government - especially state - subsidies due to, as Selingo delicately puts in "budget concerns". Those budget concerns have been manufactured and hyped over decades by the Friedmanite-Reagan supply-sided model of economics which has steadily removed wealth from the public sector and the majority of poor, working class and middle class Americans into an ever smaller number of hands. Until that trend is reversed and state, local and federal governments once again have the money they need to operate, colleges and universities will continue to become more and more out of the financial reach of many, perhaps most, Americans. Sure, universities can unbundle and reduce the extras, but there are still steep, actual costs associated with providing a rich, world-class education. Forcing colleges and universities to cut back will only chip away at the overall experience, which in turn starts a downward death spiral not only for colleges, but for the American middle class. The theoretical and statistical underpinnings for "austerity" have already been demolished. The next step is for the U.S. as a country to decide to value its future and its young people enough to invest in education rather than investing in rich people. History shows us clearly which investment gives us a better return.
168 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Jump the Gun, Confuses Issues; The College Solution is Far Better

I'm not a professional educator, but I research colleges a lot, both traditional and online, so most of this information was not new. From reading earlier reviews from education professionals, I confirmed that what I've read elsewhere in books and articles is more accurate than College Unbound.

First, is this a good book for "students or parents" as indicated on the back cover? Not in my opinion. If you're looking for help navigating your child's college path and keeping debt to a minimum, [[ASIN:0132944677 The College Solution: A Guide for Everyone Looking for the Right School at the Right Price (2nd Edition)]] (another book I read for Amazon Vine) is fantastic. It addresses current economic realities and strategies. Also, if you're looking more at the best quality education without as much concern for sticker price, other great choices are the two well-known books by Loren Pope, Colleges that Change Lives and Looking Beyond the Ivy League. I also recommend the Fiske guides.

Author, Jeffrey Selingo, says "the Class of 2020 will have a radically different college experience than their parents". However, in his own words, "The truth about change is that we tend to overestimate its speed while underestimating its reach." He could not be more right, but if your student is graduating college in 2020, it's unlikely college will resemble what he's picturing, and if he's thinking of high school graduates in 2020, I'm still doubtful. He even explains why: Colleges are protected from this change by accreditation and credentialing." I don't have a crystal ball, but my guess is the upheaval he's suggesting will possibly be important to you if your kids are ten years old or under. Even that is not necessarily true. Here's why:

Selingo says that adult students show benefit from digital schools, but that hasn't been the case for traditional college-age students. That's one thing many other sources have said, but the fact that he can't say otherwise, destroys his main premise: Digital education is the way of the future, so pay attention, parents! But, let's say it again - apparently, he's incorrect. Digital education is shown not to be optimal for students of traditional college age, the time when society expects most young adults to earn an education. Why he ignored his own point, that it works well enough for older adults but not for college-age students, is baffling unless he's creating a false sense of urgency to sell books.

Going back to the importance of credentialing, he again shoots down his own arguments. He's excited about the benefits of Massive Open Online Courses (M.O.O.C.s) with nearly no instruction and inexpensive online education "packages" with highly limited instruction such as Straighterline. Regardless of whether or not it's reasonable, people in American society now need degrees to prove they are qualified for the majority of careers. The problem is that these courses nearly never lead to credentials, which Selingo says himself. A small number of schools, mostly community colleges, will accept these courses for credit if students pass a proctored exam, but right now, the completion rate of these courses is so low and the credentialing weak. There is still the big problem of "portability". Even if a community college or marginal unknown baccalaureate college accepts your credits, if you want the class to help towards a recognized four-year degree, you'd want to research that way ahead of time, and right now that's unlikely. There's no proof yet they will become viable as career gateways.

Furthermore, expert Loren Pope argued that going away to college is not only about classroom education. It's an important transition to independence in a generally safe and fairly monitored environment. It's also necessary for developing deeper personal relationships and career networks. Last, nearly every education expert points out that online schools, so far, nearly exclusively offer pre-professional programs geared toward creating good workers instead of good thinkers, and that won't be likely to change. Developing critical thinking requires discussion, which is most effective in an in-class, in-person environment.

Except for the independence aspect, I think most of those goals can be achieved inexpensively by attending local community colleges or public universities. Loren Pope argues against community colleges (unmotivated classmates and frequently unskilled instructors) but in my experience, they can be good quality. Also, colleges today, and public schools in particular, offer much online study and often require it. So students will definitely be familiar with online study skills should they choose to pursue online education later.

Online colleges got off to an extremely bad start thanks to greedy, often unscrupulous for-profit schools. However Selingo does discuss a possible bright spot, Western Governors University. The fields best adapted to online study such as business are offered at a very low tuition rate, and while students' ratings of the school are mixed, it is slowly gaining acceptance among employers. Eventually, non-profit, budget-conscious digital colleges like WGU might be the best way for people to gain knowledge and credentials in a way that's integrated with whatever high-tech lifestyles we'll all be leading in two or three decades.

So who might benefit from this book? It might be of interest to educators and adult learners who have not researched available online options such as M.O.O.C.s, especially if they are interested in education for education's sake or are willing to navigate the difficult path that might lead to credentials, even if they aren't the highest regarded. Also, students in remote areas with no access to in-person education could learn about newly available options as well.
For parents of soon-to-be college students, look at other titles.
28 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

A view from the trenches!

As a long-time tenured college educator and the father of five college graduates , I took a special interest in Selingo's "College (Un) Bound". Selingo provides an "inside baseball" perspective on higher education and hits on some of the key issues of the day - the proliferation of specialized accreditations and their disproportionate impact on college budgets; the pursuit of research dollars that often reduce a faculty member's time in the classroom; the millennials and their Lake Wobegon perspective that all the "children" are above average; and the ongoing debate over the value of online learning.

The breadth of Selingo's coverage is both a plus and a minus. The book seems to touch on a wide range of issues, without the sense of a clear thesis; and in a number of areas there appears to be a mixed message - e.g. after lamenting the high cost of higher education (due to non-education related "arms- race" expenses such as student entertainment, recreation, housing, restaurants, major sports franchises, and the latest "must have" - a climbing wall), he later suggest that students should go to the most selective college they can get into - without reference to cost and without acknowledging that "most selective" is a relative term.

That said, I would recommend this book to those confronting the college decision (both parents and students), as well as those connected to the field of higher education. Anyone confronting a potential bill for four years of education in excess of $200,000 should certainly learn as much as they can about the product they're buying, and anyone working in higher education will encounter issues in this book that merit dialogue and consideration.
9 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

More confused than I was before

The book addresses an important topic. However there appears to be a level of analysis issue here.. The author's analysis mixes state universities and private universities. State universities have a very different set of problems when compared to private universities. States usually subsidize some part of undergraduate tuition leaving state universities to figure out how to make up the difference. Private universities depend on either endowments or on tuition revenues. The target markets for these universities are very different. What had me confused is how the author selected the universities he extols. Austin Peay State University? Southern New Hampshire University? Really? College of Wooster? There are seven practices that result in a solid undergraduate education. The universities that excel in them are well known. It would have been useful to study them.
7 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Poorly structured and strong on anecdote but thin on real evidence

A badly constructed and disappointing book although admittedly with an interesting writing style. It started off with great promise and sweeping statements. But it is confused in its style. It does not back up the assertions with evidence and does not tie together the initial assertions in the conclusion.

I wasted a good few hours of my life ploughing through this and was very disappointed.
5 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Nails the problem, but wish there were more solutions

Anyone who thinks there isn't anything wrong with higher education today will no longer think so after reading this book. Anyone who is interested in the higher education system and isn't already reading the Chronicle of Higher Education would do well to read this.

However, it's one thing to drive home the fact that the system is broken, which the author does admirably. It's another to propose solutions. Granted, that's not what this promises. Selingo does point to some good trends, especially relating to technology, and at the end of the book gives a few examples of institutions he thinks are taking positive steps. But I'd like to see from someone, if not from Selingo, a work setting out a vision for the future of higher education that we can actually achieve. Selingo seems hopefully optimistic here, but... well. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that this is more a work of observation than of leadership. Observation, as editor-at-large for the Chronicle, is Selingo's job. What I think I'm saying is that I'd like to see something similar to this, but less based on observation and more based on leadership.

That having been said, I look forward to reading more from Selingo. Hopefully in 20 years he will be able to write the story of how higher education didn't end up plunging into the abyss, after all.
5 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Important look at higher education

I am a fan of the Chronicle of Higher Education and read it regularly, including Selingo's articles in the Chronicle. I liked this book overall. As a college professor and one who works also with high school kids entering college, Selingo brings up some great points about the promises and pitfalls of going to college. I found it to be easy to read and interesting. Selingo obviously did his homework and presents very compelling data and makes some great points. What was missing for me was a cogent argument of what he feels would be good solutions - such as ideas for handling the issue of student debt, ensuring quality education, or a better picture of his thoughts of where higher education is heading. He starts to talk about them, such as his discussion on on-line education and other technological advances, but it didn't seem as well focused as the beginning of his book and seemed to offer overly simplistic solutions when offered (e.g. "encourage saving for college" or personalizing education for students). Overall, a good read with excellent points, but I wish Selingo had strengthened his ideas for solutions a bit more so I could really see where he was going with it.
4 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Every parent of a high-school and middle-school student should read this book

Book Review:

College (Un)bound
The Future of Higher Education and What It Means for Students
Jeffrey J. Selingo

Every parent of a high-school and middle-school student should read this book. It will open the eyes of the public to what is going on in higher academia behind the closed golden gates. As tuition increases each year, the question is raised how much is too much? When will it stop and at what point does that little piece of paper (degree) become too expensive and not worth the enormous debt to earn it?

Most employers require a degree from new hires, but when too many graduates can’t find work in their degree field, to what end will the colleges finally take responsibility? The colleges look like resorts, not institutions of learning. Academia no longer prides itself on learning as the priority; instead it’s the sports stadiums, rock climbing walls, leisure pools and spring-break atmosphere in order to lure prospective students to apply. Its business, the more students willing to pay the high prices, the more the colleges earn.

Author Jeffrey Selingo takes the reader through the history of what colleges used to be, and what they are now today; it is frightening to see what has become of them. It is equally as frightening to realize society still holds the degree as a golden ticket towards success in life. With the new reality it simply is not true. Graduates are now questioning if that amount of debt post graduation is really worth it when they are only in minimum wage jobs.

The author chronicles how online education, MOOCs and online lectures of Ivy League professors are paving a new path for entrance to college. With the ease and access for anyone to learn, the priority of learning for the sake of learning takes on new meaning. He details how alternative credentials of completion are being invented such as badges and accomplishment certificates. He mentions how the student only going to one school their entire academic career is moving towards an ala carte career to attain the needed requirements from many means.

As the children of today grow up towards college they will change the way teaching is done. They are so connected digitally that traditional means of teaching has to be reexamined. So what is the future of higher education in America? You’ll have to read this book for Jeffery Selingo’s vision of what the college campuses of tomorrow will look like.

To learn more about Jeffrey Selingo’s other books and lectures visit his website at: http://www.jeffselingo.com/

FTC Disclaimer: I received an ARC of this title from Net Galley for review purposes only. No other compensation was awarded.
3 people found this helpful
✓ Verified Purchase

Is the key to fixing higher education to break it up?

I attended a private religious university with heavily church-subsidized tuition, and then went on to a private university where I had tuition covered and a stipend. If you asked me about my finances during those years, I would have complained (OK, so I'd still complain now...). After more than 9 years of school (including grad school), I have some debt, but now that I've read Jeffrey J. Selingo's College (Un)Bound, I'm a lot more grateful for my relatively sheltered situation during college, and I understand a lot better the huge challenges facing many of today's high school graduates. Selingo's book starts off by showing the ways today's higher education is not meeting the needs of many of today's students, and leaving them crippled with debt. He calls the first decade of the 2000s the "Lost Decade," where things have gotten worse in most measurable ways- the cost of education, the percentage of students who graduate within 6 years, the average debt per student. He looks mainly at the middle and lower ends of higher education, where most students end up, as tradition, money, and education will probably preclude the bigger changes from sweeping through our upper-tier universities any time soon, and sees signs of hope despite all of the challenges and roadblocks.

Selingo does not excuse students and parents from the folly of taking on too much debt, but his book focuses more on what universities are or could be doing to better serve the students. He is rather excited about the ways education can be unpackaged, with easier credit transfers and more hybrid and online courses (including massive online open courses, or MOOCs), and more courses that offer recognized credentials or badges in specific skills, with students making their own path to receiving a credential. One of the things I most agree with is the need for schools to have to disclose, in clear language, all the costs and types of aid a student is getting, as many, even some financial counselors, find it an impenetrable jungle at this point. His hope is that these programs can bring costs down and help more students reach the finish line. Before, during, and after reading his book, I am filled with mixed feelings toward things like MOOCs, and I think that used in the right ways, they can be great. At the same time, you can't replace an 8-student seminar with lots of discussion, but Selingo is measured in his enthusiasm, and is not advocating a totally online study experience. He is open and honest about each idea's problems, but he is right that something needs to change, and the levels of debt students are taking on are unsustainable. Chances are, some of these changes will happen, some will flop, and some things we haven't even imagined will happen, but in the meantime, we should keep an eye on the experiments in education happening all across the country. Now, the question closer to my heart, and maybe a focus for another book- how can we fix some of the problems with graduate school?
3 people found this helpful