President Obama's "America's College Promise" plan proposes to make the first two years of community college free to address a number of concerns: American competitiveness, inequality and the bad odds that less advantaged students face in obtaining good jobs.
Although there may be widespread agreement on the goals, many observers think the Congress will refuse to fund the administration's approach to funding colleges. Funding students themselves may be more acceptable politically, and it would offer substantive advantages by accommodating new approaches to learning and targeting resources where they are most needed.
Funding students is better suited to a world in which technology is changing education. Colleges' monopoly on what must be learned to obtain a degree will become anachronistic as online courses and MOOCs (massive, on-line, open entry courses) become better and more pervasive. Restricting "learning" to young students seeking a college-specified degree is no longer adequate. All of us must embrace life-long learning to stay competitive in a world where workplaces change constantly and quickly.
For example, suppose a graphic designer wants a course in designing for a new mobile device, and it is offered on-line by MIT. Should she wait until her community college offers it? A disadvantaged student should be helped to pay for the on-line course. Coursera, an online educator, creates Verified Certificates for what students learn. By paying $49 and passing a test a student can get a certificate in Introduction to Classical Music from Yale. Is there any reason that should count less than a course on the same subject given by the local college? An accumulation of such certificates or badges would be as good as a college degree in signifying an educated person. The badge route will be more responsive to changes in the job market — unlike the curriculum change process in most colleges.
Funding the student can help students acquire "soft" skills such as responsibility, customer service, teamwork and oral communication. While employers emphasize them, universities' admission requirements tend to ignore courses in these skills. Full-time students may pick up soft skills on campus, but those who work and go to college part-time don't spend much time socializing at school.
The soft skills are better acquired at the job-site than in the classroom or college cafeteria. Students can — and already do — learn and demonstrate these skills while acting as volunteers or participating in other activities. Mentors — the baseball coach or orchestra conductor, the scout leader or local government official — can teach and document performance. These documents — verified resumes — may not count as "college credit," but they will impress employers by validating real-world skills.
Funding students allows targeting of those most in need. About one student in five finishes a two-year degree within three years. An equal proportion transfers to four-year colleges. If the goal is to help those most in need, resources should flow to students among the three in five who now drop out but would persevere if certain obstacles were removed.
Many disadvantaged students enrolled in open-entry colleges must take remedial courses. These courses do not count toward a degree but add to the time and cost of education and often result in a student dropping out. Research shows that many would benefit more from support services, such as counseling, than from eliminating tuition.
Community colleges serve a diverse student body: diverse in age, in financial resources and obligations, in academic skills and in the reasons they enroll. The age of their average enrolled student is 29, two-thirds attend part-time and most work (over 80 percent in California). The diversity poses a dilemma of academic education vs "vocational," preparation for college or career, hard versus soft skills. Generally, academic faculty and administrators favor the former.
Math requirements illustrate the targeting problem when institutions serve diverse groups. At least one college that I know of ended their practice of offering occupationally-oriented math courses and instead required all students to take the more abstract math course demanded by the state university. This course became a barrier for students seeking two-year degrees in criminal justice or environmental studies. Employers seek practical skills such as budgeting and scheduling; colleges want calculus.
Acquiring and documenting skills — hard and soft, academic and practical — is a life-long venture. The learning process should not be dictated by colleges or universities that specialize in youngsters under the age of 25, who are often less serious learners than those with more life experience. Fund the learner, not the institution.
Arnold Packer is the former assistant secretary of labor in the Carter Administration and former chief economist of the U.S. Senate Budget Committee. His email is arnold.packer@gmail.com.