Last summer, the Department of Education — whose personnel was cut in half by President Donald Trump — announced a new rule to “hold all colleges and universities accountable for low-earning programs.”
Under the novel “Earnings Accountability” rule, undergraduate programs whose graduates do not earn more than people with high school diplomas in the same age cohort, 25 to 34, will lose eligibility for federal student loans. Similarly, graduate programs whose graduates do not earn more than people with a bachelor’s degree will lose funding.
The rule, passed as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, is meant to give students a return on their investment in a college education. Presumably, it would also allow the government to save a bit of money — an understandable desire given that the national debt hit $40 trillion just two months ago, according to CBS News. It’s an honorable pursuit, in my eyes, to want to ensure college students aren’t being scammed. As written, however, this rule puts flawed standards on programs and raises questions about how we value a degree in today’s society.
Education is key to America’s success. While nobody seriously denies the value of world-class institutions like MIT, Stanford or Harvard, there is a real sense of skepticism toward art-based degree programs, which we often hear derided as worthless. That sentiment is now reflected in national policy, as the The Chronicle of Higher Education explains, the arts are among the biggest losers under the Earnings Accountability rule.
Dance, music, theater and studio art are all degrees that can pay less than other majors but benefit all of us. The arts are key to developing some of our brightest young minds. Artists shape our culture and country from music, entertainment and popular media to cultural critique and emotional connection. Some of the most prestigious music programs in our country, like the Juilliard School and the New England Conservatory, are among those predicted to fail the new rule.
It would be remiss of me not to mention another big loser: educators. Specifically, specialized educator programs such as early childhood education will be hurt more than any other two-year program as reported by WLRN, an NPR affiliate and public radio and television station for South Florida. It seems like a mistake to cut off federal loans to the students in these programs who do a great service to society by continuing their work.
Even if you take the Department of Education at its word, it’s still not entirely fair to compare salaries without considering the actual cost of the program in question. The debt-to-earnings ratio of different degrees varies wildly, and the Earnings Accountability rule does not account for this at all.
A program that saddles a student with $200,000 in debt but earns them a $75,000 salary will likely survive the rule despite enrollment not necessarily being a good financial decision. For many students, it is the enormous debt they carry around that is the problem, not their current salary. Even if we accept the premise that loan reform is needed to prevent financial hardship, the rule has major flaws in accomplishing this.
It’s a fair question to ask whether some degree programs are giving the value their students are paying for, but salary alone is not capable of answering that. Knowledge, satisfaction, societal contribution and connections collectively contribute to the value of a college education, and that’s something money can’t measure. Even if we examine salary alone, early-career earnings may not be a good representation of the financial impact of a degree over the long term.
The Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities explains that degree holders enjoy steeper wage growth than nonholders, meaning someone with a bachelor’s has a good chance of ending up with a higher salary than if they hadn’t gone to school, even if it isn’t immediate.
For the good of our country and our higher education system, salary cannot be the sole determiner over whether a college program has succeeded or failed in providing value to its graduates. A degree is much more than that, and so is the financial impact of said degree. A combination of criteria, such as a debt-to-earnings ratio and a longer earnings window, would yield a more robust and defensible rule.
Hence then, the article about opinion college degrees cost more than a salary was published today ( ) and is available on The Crimson White ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Opinion .. College degrees cost more than a salary )
Also on site :
- Dan-O's Seasoning Secures Strategic Investment of $25M from The Newcastle Network to Bring Bold Flavor to More Kitchens
- 2003 Haunting Smash Luther Vandross Called ‘The Most Important Song of My Life’ Remains a Beloved Soul Masterpiece
- ¿Quién es el candidato favorito para ganar las elecciones en Brasil? Esto dicen las encuestas sobre Lula y Flávio Bolsonaro