Community colleges are a good idea for many, but not everyone should be encouraged to go to college

3/28/1999

For the last year or so, there has been quite a lot of discussion in this newspaper, the radio talk shows, and the state legislature about what to do about raising the standards of this state's public school systems' students and educators so that the high school diploma will be worth more than the paper it is printed on. For a number of years now, there has been the mantra that everyone has to go to college. Advertisements highlight the "advantages" of a college degree -- usually the difference in expected income.

Yes, certain "professional" occupations and career paths require one or more college degrees. But it shouldn't require a college degree to be an auto mechanic either. With everyone being force fed with the idea that college is a must, the value of an associate (and many a bachelor) college degree has been cheapened to the point that its value is hardly above that of a high school diploma.

If everyone were to go to college and, in an ideal world, graduate, who then would be going into the skilled trades? Who is going to do your quality plumbing, electrical work, carpentry, locksmithing, auto repair, etc? The high school dropout? The athlete who never graduated from college and didn't get into the NFL or NBA? Do you know what a self-employed plumber or electrician gets these days including a service call fee for a house call? An hourly rate higher than a four-year graduate in liberal arts or one with an associate's degree in criminal justice.

The college glut is such that there are even graduates from four-year schools without jobs in their field and some with doctoral degrees who drive taxi cabs. Is there something shameful or less honorable about not being "white collar" and working with your hands, getting them dirty? The skilled tradesman who does quality work will always be in demand. For years, the so-called experts have dwelled on the lack of student self- esteem harangue. Why not redirect some of this self-esteem lecturing to encompass that life does not end if you do not enter college but go on to learn a skilled trade starting with the ninth or tenth grade?

Some would argue that I sound like an elitist, a product of the meritocracy ideals of the pre-60's upon which most of the nation's traditional colleges were founded. Also being part of the higher-education system, some might say that I am committing heresy. However I consider myself a pragmatist. Without kidding ourselves, it is fair to say that not every student is college material and this reality transcends racial, socio-economic, and gender-based factors.

Those who can't get into the four-year college by virtue of either their academic or athletic abilities then frequently enter community colleges as the last resort -- unfortunately, many with substandard academic (and sometimes social) skills. Yes, we do not expect everyone to be an "Einstein," but many, who are products of our dumbed-down public education system, are woefully underprepared.

For these students, community colleges, for the public good, often do give many of these students a second chance to show that they have the ability to do college level work. However the darker side is that colleges are now relegated to spending disproportionate resources to re-educating these students in what the high schools should have adequately done in the first place. Colleges, even community colleges, should not be teaching students how to read and write simple English! The response to this dilemma is, "if we don't do it, who will?" Employers need their employees to be able to read and write acceptable English and are now often providing in-house or contracted course work to improve communicative skills of their employees.

The community college was created over forty years ago primarily to appeal to the "non-traditional" student and usually has an open admissions policy. This is a egalitarian policy where either any student having a high school diploma (or it's equivalent) or those "having the ability to benefit (or profit) from instruction" -- a vaguely worded phrase having no precise definition developed by the federal Higher Education Act of 1965 to qualify some students for financial aid without having a high school diploma or GED certificate -- are readily admitted. The community college philosophy is one that every student can succeed. In utopia this would be a laudable goal. Realistically, today this is not the case and unlike the PC world, the outcomes are not equal.

Community college administrators and their faculty are rightly proud of those students who after many years of hard work finally graduate. There are many success stories that can be told. However, they should be equally dismayed with the many who do not. In one study, it was estimated that less than a third of the community college students do graduate. In a study I did several years ago, I found that, for the engineering technologies which I teach, the attrition rate is appallingly very high. For those who require two more levels of remedial coursework, only approximately one-tenth make it to graduation.

After 13 years in engineering research and development, I have taught electrical engineering technology at the community college level for the last 17 years. As part of my duties, I am to advise students, many of which, in my opinion, should not even be in college, or at least not in a rigorous program such as mine where the ability to handle mathematics is a prime concern. Once matriculated, I then frequently encounter those students who, based on placement scores on standardized tests, are required to take several levels of remedial work in reading, writing, and mathematics upwards for two years before they even take a single "college level" course for credit counting towards a degree. Unfortunately, I know that most of these students will never make it. Many are not self-motivated, have no idea of why they are in college, and worst of all, have no idea of why they are in a particular program of study.

As one way of fixing the secondary educational system, perhaps we should go back to a form of the German system whereby around the eighth or ninth grade, the academically qualified students (yes, a meritocracy) would proceed to the equivalent of our high school and those not so academically inclined would be taught a skilled trade and be provided with the necessary social skills, motivation, and counseling to adequately market themselves. Then upon graduation from high school, they would have a viable means with which to earn a decent living with some measure of upward mobility instead of flipping hamburgers and making milkshakes.

Howard M. Berlin, of Wilmington, has taught at the college and graduate school levels for more than 17 years.