|
 |
University and Technical Educations:
Are They the Same?
Tylor Claggett
Economics and Finance
A remarkable, largely unnoticed,
transformation has taken place in higher education. I am
referring to a blurring of the lines of distinction
between the university experience and the technical
school experience. This transformation has important
consequences for students, parents, tax payers, those
that hire recent graduates and all of society.
About forty years ago, education policy makers
recognized the need for university graduates (society’s
problem solvers and innovative thinkers) and for
technical school graduates (society’s skilled workers
accomplishing multifaceted, often repetitive, complex
tasks).
Community college systems multiplied as their graduates
were valued employees. These institutions paralleled the
existing university systems. They attracted many non
college bound high school graduates and trained them to
be productive members of society. So what changed?
Actually, many things changed.
Many two-year schools “grew up” and became new four-year
colleges and universities. A growing population,
accompanied by increases in those wanting four-year
university degrees was one cause for this phenomenon.
Another was the desire of administrators to grow their
institutions. A viable way to get more resources from
state legislatures was to advocate for a four-year
school in the local area. Local state representatives
gladly accommodated because a new four-year institution
was a tangible accomplishment in any re-election
campaign. Finally, many comprehensive universities
became too large to manage effectively. Increasing
enrollments taxed parking, traffic, classroom, lab, and
housing infrastructures. More regional four-year schools
seemed like the remedy.
Complacent four-year universities and colleges often
failed to court state legislatures when traditional
college tuitions and other fees began to increase
rapidly. Community colleges convinced many that a less
expensive alternative was for many students to live at
home for two years and attend the local community
college before transferring to a larger, more
comprehensive traditional state university.
The four-year schools ignored proposals by two-year
schools for individual bilateral articulation agreements
by which students could transfer and have previous
community college credit count toward selected four-year
degrees. Again, due to good lobbying by the two-year
schools, the responses to these cool receptions were the
drafting of across-the-board articulation agreements
between entire community college systems and same state
traditional universities. These were more or less forced
upon traditional public colleges and universities
because of political pressure.
General articulation agreements represented a cu-de-taut
for community colleges because they allowed them to
promote themselves as low cost avenues to four-year
educations. Community colleges typically enjoy labor
cost advantages because their faculties normally have
lower academic qualifications, higher teaching loads and
fewer, if any, research requirements. Other differences
are an absence of many extra curricular activities such
as intercollegiate sports teams and a lack of on-campus
housing and dining facilities.
There appears to be a coming together of the curriculums
at both types of institutions. University curriculums
seem to focus less now on problem solving skills,
philosophic thought and liberal arts while many two-year
school curriculums have drifted away from customary
vocational training. Is it necessary for a professor
with a high profile Ph.D. to teach multiple sections of
most freshman courses? Are courses at community colleges
really equivalent to the “same” courses at comprehensive
universities? When young people live at home, does it
make for better students? Does living away from home
help students develop a sense of independence and self
reliance? Are tax payers poorly served by funding
construction for new dorms when many undergraduate
students would rather live off-campus? Do employers and
society need more problem solvers or technicians? The
answer to all of these questions is a resounding “it
depends.”
In conclusion, the need for both classic university and
traditional technical educations is, in all likelihood,
greater now than ever. Most policy makers and the public
seem to have lost sight of the distinction. They
consider all types of education to be the same with
interchangeable parts. This could be a costly blunder,
especially with greater global competition and more
rapidly changing business, political and social
environments.
Back to Academic Life Page |
|
|