Colleges in Dire Financial Straits

[lightning]

What I don't get is how a lot of these business programs get a free pass, when it comes to scrutinizing programs.

EVERYTHING is a business. When everything is a business, every and any business school graduate who gets a job--any job--is a "job placement." A business school curriculum is a very generalized curriculum to supposedly satisfy the workforce needs of EVERY business. Common sense tells me that is impossible. Yet, kids and their parents flock to business programs thinking that a business degree* is a practical degree that leads to a job. Well, duh. A business degree leads to a job, because EVERYTHING is a business. There are graduates of our business school who are receptionists at real estate offices, entry level help desk for IT companies, telemarketers, night managers of a big box retail store or hotel, sole proprietors of their start-up lawn service, used car salesmen, and other jobs that where one does not really need a business degree to get a job and be successful. And the business school can call them "placements" or "working alumni in the business field" or "gainfully employed" because EVERYTHING is a business.

But when you try to apply the same logic to Humanities programs, where the graduates are receptionists at real estate offices, entry level help desk for IT companies, telemarketers, night managers of a big box retail store or hotel, sole proprietors of their start-up lawn service, used car salesmen, and other jobs that where one does not really need a Humanities degree to get a job and be successful, all of a sudden those students are seen as unemployed in their field of training in the Humanities.

What's even more unfair is when those aforementioned graduates do go on and get high paying jobs in finance, business administration, marketing/sales, or start their own successful company, etc. they are seen as Humanities folk who succeeded despite their Humanities background and the successful person's Humanities degree program is given no credit for their graduate's success (vs if they had a business degree where the business school can take credit for preparing their graduates for these important high-paying jobs).

I have a similar rant for IT programs, but this post is getting too long.


* I am excluding Accounting degrees in this discussion.

[marshwiggle]

What I don't get is how a lot of these business programs get a free pass, when it comes to scrutinizing programs.

EVERYTHING is a business. When everything is a business, every and any business school graduate who gets a job--any job--is a "job placement."
..
There are graduates of our business school who are receptionists at real estate offices, entry level help desk for IT companies, telemarketers, night managers of a big box retail store or hotel, sole proprietors of their start-up lawn service, used car salesmen, and other jobs that where one does not really need a business degree to get a job and be successful. And the business school can call them "placements" or "working alumni in the business field" or "gainfully employed" because EVERYTHING is a business.

But when you try to apply the same logic to Humanities programs, where the graduates are receptionists at real estate offices, entry level help desk for IT companies, telemarketers, night managers of a big box retail store or hotel, sole proprietors of their start-up lawn service, used car salesmen, and other jobs that where one does not really need a Humanities degree to get a job and be successful, all of a sudden those students are seen as unemployed in their field of training in the Humanities.

What's even more unfair is when those aforementioned graduates do go on and get high paying jobs in finance, business administration, marketing/sales, or start their own successful company, etc. they are seen as Humanities folk who succeeded despite their Humanities background and the successful person's Humanities degree program is given no credit for their graduate's success (vs if they had a business degree where the business school can take credit for preparing their graduates for these important high-paying jobs).

This is a fair comment about double standards. And institutions do play pretty fast and loose with "employment of graduates" criteria and statistics.

My concern in regard to issues like this, like the "adjunct porn" stories, is the self-reported disillusionment of graduates of any program. (There may be some bias in which of these get sought out and published.)

What I want to know is the proportion of graduates who are satisfied with their outcomes; salary doesn't really matter as long as people are content.

I have a similar rant for IT programs, but this post is getting too long.

I look forward to hearing it. (And any others as well.)

[spork]

For most colleges and universities, "business" is the bucket that catches the unmotivated and underprepared applicants that schools need to enroll in order to keep the lights on. These are not people capable of majoring in mathematics, chemistry, or history. Hence the popularity of majors like "sports management" within business departments.

[ciao_yall]

For most colleges and universities, "business" is the bucket that catches the unmotivated and underprepared applicants that schools need to enroll in order to keep the lights on. These are not people capable of majoring in mathematics, chemistry, or history. Hence the popularity of majors like "sports management" within business departments.

Agreed. And also the catch for students who started off in Engineering, flunked out, but whose parents insist they major in something "useful."

[apl68]

For most colleges and universities, "business" is the bucket that catches the unmotivated and underprepared applicants that schools need to enroll in order to keep the lights on. These are not people capable of majoring in mathematics, chemistry, or history. Hence the popularity of majors like "sports management" within business departments.

Agreed. And also the catch for students who started off in Engineering, flunked out, but whose parents insist they major in something "useful."

Although I'm tempted to share you two's prejudices regarding business majors, I don't think they're entirely fair.  Business majors also include many first-generation students who are trying to get an education but come from backgrounds that have given them very little sense of the possibilities out there.  If they don't want to teach school, work with sick people, or go into IT, they major in business because that's the only other thing they know about that requires a college degree. 

I talked to a student of my acquaintance who is majoring in business for that reason only a couple of evenings ago.  She's not an idiot or a goof-off, and she wasn't raised by idiots.  She's very bright and, near as I can tell, hardworking.  She doesn't really want to major in business.  But again, if you don't much like computers, and you don't want to teach or work with sick people, what else is there?  Beauty college?  Welding school?  With the demise of liberal arts in most smaller colleges, there's really not much else to major in for students in many parts of the country.  Their family backgrounds did not make them aware of wider possibilities, and cutbacks in the offerings of regional colleges mean that these places can no longer offer more.

This is why the end of liberal arts at regional school like Henderson State University saddens so many people.  A generation ago, when I was in college, a student who was interested in higher education could go to small schools and be made aware of a lot more out there than what he or she had grown up with.  There was at least a chance of a student finding something and going with it.  That's essentially what happened to me.  Even though I found myself regretting getting sucked into a PhD program, I'm still glad I had that chance at getting a wider education as an undergrad.  But those chances are gone now for students in our region.

[downer]

There are many majors offered by business schools. I remember seeing some "Risk Management" majors. That seemed very focused. More recently I've seen "Business Analytics." I think even the "Sports Management" majors are in the business school. Many of those students seem very content to get a B or a C, but I don't really notice much difference between them and other students.

[marshwiggle]

At my university, business is a very competitive program; the incoming grade requirement is higher than for most other programs, so it's not possible for people to go there after they've failed out of anything else. (Also, for students in business, if they fail they can't get back in.)

[mamselle]

Didn't Octo used to compare programs that had more difficult required accountancy courses and those with fewer such as a basis for distinction?

Seems like that would make a difference.

M.

[waterboy]

But again, if you don't much like computers, and you don't want to teach or work with sick people, what else is there?  Beauty college?  Welding school?

For those of us in the sciences, hell there's LOTS of other choices. Also, the applied design fields such as architecture and landscape architecture. And many more. You're being awfully narrow minded there.

[Wahoo Redux]

I've taught a great deal of technical and business writing, and I can honestly say that I like my business students.  Many of them are very bright and honestly enthusiastic about business, but just as many are incredibly dull people with no real aim except to be employed somewhere.  Nice but mediocre.

I would say that I see a difference between accounting (very smart), marketing (smart and creative), finance (very good at math but not reliably good at other things) and other majors enfolded within business.

Again, the problem is not with business as a major; the problem is that so many students see business as the only option given business concepts like ROI and such.  And again, this is the public perception of the humanities degrees-----anyone seen that wretched movie "Tully?"  It's bad, don't watch it.  The significance here is that the main protagonist (a disgruntled housewife) regrets her decision to be an "English lit major" at one point in the story because, of course, she could do nothing with it other than to raise her frightening children.  It's a throwaway line in the movie, but there it is.

[Hibush]

the main protagonist (a disgruntled housewife) regrets her decision to be an "English lit major" at one point in the story because, of course, she could do nothing with it other than to raise her frightening children.  It's a throwaway line in the movie, but there it is.

Someone is likely to claim that English lit also leaves one poorly prepared to raise frightening children.

[dismalist]

the main protagonist (a disgruntled housewife) regrets her decision to be an "English lit major" at one point in the story because, of course, she could do nothing with it other than to raise her frightening children.  It's a throwaway line in the movie, but there it is.

Someone is likely to claim that English lit also leaves one poorly prepared to raise frightening children.

Apparently, Economics is great preparation for raising children! Just recently, I chanced upon a video talk by David Friedman, Milton Friedman's son, recounting that when he and has sister were about 12 years old and traveling by train from Chicago to the West Coast -- three days, two nights -- Milton asked his kids whether they would rather travel sleeper or get the extra spending money saved by using coach. The kids said they'd rather have the cash.

I've tried to raise my daughter in similar fashion, but didn't have quite the panache that Milton had! My daughter does understand, and consequently despises, trade-offs.

Don't know how many here are in their child bearing years, but if any, do look at economist Emily Oster's Expecting Better, about pregnancy. You will feel better having read it. My wife, the obstetrician, used to hand it out to her patients.

[apl68]

But again, if you don't much like computers, and you don't want to teach or work with sick people, what else is there?  Beauty college?  Welding school?

For those of us in the sciences, hell there's LOTS of other choices. Also, the applied design fields such as architecture and landscape architecture. And many more. You're being awfully narrow minded there.

Let me clarify that these are not MY thoughts on the subject.  It's what I see students apparently thinking because a) they're first-generation students who haven't been made aware of what  more is out there and b) the nearest college--the only one in an hour's radius of home--doesn't offer much more than this relative handful of areas of study.  Sure they know in a general way that there are lots of other skilled professions out there, but it's like these things exist in another world from what they know.  And they can't seem to see any bridge into that world.  The region's colleges and their pared-down offerings don't seem to offer such a bridge.

[mamselle]

Yes. Islands aren't just constructed of small land masses surrounded by water.

There are other kinds of islands that are just as hard to get off of without the right boat or bridge.

M.

[spork]

For most colleges and universities, "business" is the bucket that catches the unmotivated and underprepared applicants that schools need to enroll in order to keep the lights on. These are not people capable of majoring in mathematics, chemistry, or history. Hence the popularity of majors like "sports management" within business departments.

Agreed. And also the catch for students who started off in Engineering, flunked out, but whose parents insist they major in something "useful."

Although I'm tempted to share you two's prejudices regarding business majors

[. . .]

They're not prejudices. National studies of college student academic performance by field of study have shown that on average business majors are at the bottom. For the colleges and universities that are not Stanford, Northwestern, or Chicago, academic programs with a "business" label are cash cows, because they attract large numbers of underprepared, underprivileged, or simply lazy undergrads. These students aren't majoring in data science, economics, or even accounting, because those majors require *gulp* math. Their diplomas read "management," "business administration," or "marketing."

Here is a good descriptive account; it's more than a decade old but from what I can see the situation hasn't improved, and it might have gotten worse: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/education/edlife/edl-17business-t.html.

Mediocre, relatively small colleges and universities have relied on "business" programs to enroll undergrads for decades. They are far cheaper to establish than engineering programs, and their lack of value is easier to camouflage. Many of these schools also have useless MBA programs whose only function has also been to generate tuition revenue. I think this era is slowly coming to an end.