< PREVIOUS ] [ 2004 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
One of the big issues before our legislature is higher education. Our colleges and universities point out that they're suffering from the state funding cutbacks in recent years. Meanwhile students and potential students wonder where they're going to find the money for college.
Fortunately, the General Assembly could solve all of these problems with one simple amendment to our civil-rights laws.
As it is, it's illegal for an employer to discriminate
on the basis of race, religion, sex, age and the like. But
it is quite legal to discriminate on the basis of
education; just look through the classified ads and you'll
see phrases like BA required
and minimum
MBA.
Granted, many jobs require specialized knowledge and certain skills, and colleges often impart the knowledge and skills. But the skills and knowledge can be acquired in other ways -- home study and apprenticeship come to mind -- and employers could certainly test applicants, rather than rely on college credentials.
In my days as an editor who hired reporters, I never noticed that reporters with college degrees performed any better than reporters without college degrees. As an American citizen, I haven't noticed that any recent presidents, all with college degrees, have been much of an improvement on Harry Truman -- who never went to college.
What of the licensed professions which now require
college degrees? As it is, if you complain that a science
teacher does not know that water boils at a lower
temperature here than at sea level -- and who won't even
investigate the possibility -- you'll hear that She has
a college degree and is certified by the state, so it's not
our fault.
Eliminate the educational requirement, so
that the school board takes responsibility for the quality
of people it hires. That would have to be a big improvement
on the current system.
As for physicians, have the educational requirements protected us against malpractice, billing fraud and iatrogenic diseases? Aren't we free citizens in a market economy, perfectly capable of deciding ourselves whether to seek the services of a physician, a faith healer, or the woman down the street who sells herbal remedies?
Law school? Clarence Darrow and Abraham Lincoln managed without it, and they served their clients well.
It might take a few years to adjust, but it's hard to see how society would suffer if we made it illegal to discriminate on the basis of education.
Further, discriminating on the basis of education (rather than knowledge or skills) is actually yet another way of oppressing the poor. In a recent Newsweek article, the president of the University of Michigan observed that less than 20 percent of her students came from households with annual incomes of less than $50,000. The median household income in Michigan is $46,000.
It's not hard to see what those numbers mean, and it isn't because poor kids are stupid. A study published about a year ago by the Century Fund reported that if you take two high-school graduates with the same grades and test scores, but one is from the top income quartile and the other from the bottom -- the bottom is half as likely to go to college.
And even if the poor kid makes it through school, financial aid these days generally means a pile of debt at graduation.
The usual governmental solution to this problem is to increase financial aid, and thereby increase the debt burden.
But our state government could apply a different
solution -- by making it illegal to discriminate against
people without college degrees while making it clear that
employers are free to judge on real skills and knowledge.
Then young people, rich and poor, could pursue careers
without the need
to attend college first.
Would this hurt our colleges?
No. Colleges today give equal degrees to students who have learned their lessons and to party animals who found the easiest classes and still barely passed.
Colleges would improve once they adapted to having students who wanted to broaden their knowledge, rather than grab a credential. In fact, all U.S. schools would improve if a diploma actually indicated that students had learned something, rather than that they had put in their time.
So, the state legislature could fix several problems by just adding a few words to the state's anti-discrimination laws. It would improve our workforce and our schools, while easing the lot of the poor and assisting in upward mobility. It's so simple and easy that it's safe to predict it will never happen.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 2004 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >