Home > Uncategorized > If Most Students Aren’t Ready for College, Why Are So Many Going?

Comments 1 Comment

Do today’s high school students have what it takes to succeed in college? If you look at the latest numbers from the nonprofit organization that administers the SAT and Advanced Placement testing programs, most don’t.

The College Board recently released a report in which it determined that 58% of SAT test-takers in the class of 2015 were not ready for college-level work or, for that matter, a successful post–high school career for those who choose to forgo continuing their institutional education.

To some who teach at the college level, this probably comes as no surprise, as more and more first- and second-year students appear to be struggling to keep up with the work. The problem, however, shouldn’t be dismissed as exclusively the fault of an educational system that fails to adequately prepare their young charges for what comes after they have been herded through the lower grades.

Rather, what deserves closer examination is the questionable ethics of encouraging students who are clearly not equipped with the skills and resources to succeed in college to apply nonetheless—and accepting them into programs they are unlikely to complete.

What other explanation could there when nearly 70% of all high school graduates end up in college when only 42% are up to the challenge?

Higher education is a volume-driven business. So it’s reasonable to assume that as the number of college-ready applicants declines, those schools that are under pressure may choose to respond by relaxing admission standards. Yet how would that shift in policy be communicated to the faculty? In a memo that essentially says, “Heads up, folks: We’ve just dropped trou on admissions, so ease up on your curricula.”

It’s a mystery that the college graduation rate is still stuck in the 60% range (when outcomes are measured at the six-year mark) and student-loan payment delinquencies are mounting. Those are some of the issues the Obama administration is now attempting to address.

Two weekends ago, the Department of Education released a mass of information called the College Scorecard that it hopes will help students and families to make more informed decisions about the schools they are considering. The institution-specific information includes outcome (graduation) and loan-repayment rates along with median salary levels for those who received federal aid in the form of grants and loans.

Given that more than two-thirds of all college students borrow to fund their education and that the federal government is fronting roughly 90% of that, this latest data dump covers more than half of all attendees at the nation’s public, private and for-profit colleges and universities.

This move, however, is not without its critics.

Some say that more emphasis is being placed on earnings than on the personal developmental benefits of attending college. Others worry about income disparities that exist between careers and disparate geographical locations. Still more complain that even if the data covers more than half of all college students, it’s hard to know how that of those not included might have altered the result.

At first, I too was put off by an analysis that seemed to be crassly materialistic. But then I thought about how higher education is sold in this country: not so much as a national ideal, as it is a means for earning 30%, 40% or more than someone with a high school diploma. And since the cost of that education has increased to the point that few students and their families are able to fund that expense through excess household cash flow, borrowing for college has become routine.

As such, it seems only fair for schools to be measured on this economic basis, which brings me back to the issue of college readiness.

I once had a business partner who was fond of saying, “Just because you can doesn’t mean that you should.” College is an expensive proposition, and the average debt that students take on from school will be difficult (if not impossible) to repay without completing a marketable degree from a respected organization.

Note that I say respected, not elite, even though the latest data from the ED highlights the economic advantage of a degree that’s earned from the best of the best. That’s because I believe it’s more what you do with what you have learned than it is where you learned it.

To that point, a little more than a year ago I wrote an article entitled “Who Cares Where You Went to College?” In it, I referenced a survey that was conducted by Gallup and the Lumina Foundation, which found that the percentage of American adults who viewed school choice as a forerunner to success was nearly twice that of the business leaders who ended up employing their children.

The takeaway is this: If you’re a high school student and you plan on continuing your education, think long and hard on these two questions.

Is the Timing Right?

Do you have a direction in mind, and are you prepared to commit to the work that will be required? By that I mean, are you confident that you have the necessary maturity, aptitude and discipline to finish what you started? If not, consider working for a year or two in between high school and college. More than a few of the young adults I’ve employed and taught needed that extra time to find themselves before becoming successful later on.

Have You Made the Right Choice?

Does the public, private, two-year, four-year or vocational school you‘re considering offer the program you need for the career you want—at a price you can afford? Specifically, if the cost of the school that you’ve targeted (and can get into) is likely to result in student-loan payments that will exceed 10% to 15% of your post-graduation income, I urge you to reconsider your decision. I say that because whatever promise your future may hold, it could very well end up diminished by the money worries that will distract you for years to come.

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its partners.

More on Student Loans:

Image: iStock

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • educator57

    The problem is, as the author notes, that 58% of high school graduates are not ready for college–but they’re also not ready for anything else! So until we can get some nationally enforceable standards to ensure that high schools are not graduating students until they are either prepared for a job or for higher education, additional schooling is about the students’ only option.

    High schools have increasingly put young people out on the streets with a substandard education, no life skills and little or no vocational training. With no other options for many students, and fewer and fewer high school graduates truly ready for higher education, colleges try to fill the gap and take in students who appear to have the potential to eventually succeed in completing a degree or other program that will give these underprepared students a chance to earn a decent living

    At the community college level, this might be training in a skilled trade, preparatory (remedial) classes for regular college admission, a certificate, or, eventually, an associate’s degree. At a regular 4-year college, it is likely that the student will be required to enroll in remedial courses (below 100-level, or the minimum level classes that will count toward a degree) while being integrated into a regular degree or certificate program.

    The problem with students having to take remedial courses, either at the community college or at a 4-year college, is that students have to pay college tuition for classes they should have mastered for free in their K-12 school years. This means that the schools, the students and their families, and the federal, state and local governments are paying for more than 4 years of college for a four-year degree, because, essentially, they are paying a second time for the education that should have been received before high school graduation.

    Being that they are starting at a disadvantage, many students who because of the drawbacks associated with the length of time they need to be in college (at any level) do not persist through the degree or certificate program. The longer the student is in school, the greater the cost of tuition, fees, books, etc. and the greater likelihood that the student will not complete the academic program due to circumstances such as lack of funds, having to work, family obligations, etc.

    So it’s back to square one. We must demand that high schools prepare students with the education and practical training to be ready for the workplace or for higher education before handing them a diploma. Then colleges can get back to the business of providing a HIGHER education.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team