No, we are still sending too many who cannot benefit to college, where they become debt slaves.
"[Mary Cumnock Cook, the Ucas chief executive] concluded her argument by stating that: "sticking to academic qualifications doesn’t close any doors, regardless of whether you want to apply for a top apprenticeship or a top university."
Even accepting that she was batting for the universities who are having to chase rather harder for business these days, her argument does raise several questions about what education is about and whether many of those going on to university have the time or resources to pursue education for anything other than for a vocational end.
Celebrating an increase in numbers sitting A-levels is rather contrary at a time when the country is flooded with graduates with degrees in subjects that have little market value.
A study conducted by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) some 10 months ago revealed that 58.8 per cent of UK graduates have ended up in non-graduate jobs, with around one in 12 of those working in low skilled jobs, such as in coffee shops, bars, call centres and at hospitality events.
Surely, therefore, it is right to question whether we are getting the fit right and whether university is the best option for all of these students, particularly considering the levels of debt they rack up."
Of course it is. In the US as in GB we have simply gone mad for college. It is little more than a cargo cult belief, but is is proving deeply damaging for exactly the people least capable of dealing with the fallout, the poor, and lower classes.
"What is crucial is that those with the ability and desire to go on to university should not be deterred from doing so, particularly because of cost. This is where greater effort is required, by teachers, schools and universities, to ensure that we encourage and support the most able and those who have the ability, focus and maturity to do well, rather than trying to steer all students towards university as a matter of course.
Of course, it is imperative that those who are able and set on a certain course of study, especially those from poorer socio-economic groups, are not put off because they fear the threat of falling into debt with no guarantee of employment at the end of their course."
This is the standard, but how both GB and the US go after this leads to a completely different outcome. We have found a way to lobby nearly every student to go to college, and the government provides all manner of loans and aid to help out. This makes even absurdly expensive low value private colleges within in the reach of even poor students. To make matters worse, in the US affirmative action goals drive colleges to enroll lower achieving minorities, and offer them significant scholarships. This creates a system where most of the time the minorities are paying much less, and performing more poorly than the remaining group. This only reinforces stereotypes, it cannot alleviate them.
It also causes many minority students to have not just academic problems but emotional problems, since they doubt their own abilities, and question whether the stereotype is accurate. As a result dropouts are higher in this group than they should be, and the number of dropouts who are turned into debt slaves is increased dramatically. Students who could have performed well at a mid level state school, perform poorly at a higher level private school, incure more debt than they would have in the public school, and ultimately drop out, becoming debt slave since they never are able to secure the job pay necessary to comfortably repay the debt.
It is almost like the KKK has designed our college payments and aid system.
We are not in this boat alone, the progressive movement has polluted much of the rest of the world's education system as well, yet we need to take control of the system and return it to balance.
This will be difficult in a world where it is the credential, not the education which motivates.