The Purpose of Higher Education

There is debate regarding the purpose of higher education – is it to get a job or get an education? My philosophy of higher education is that we are not preparing our graduates for their first job, we are preparing them for a lifetime of jobs. So, the short answer for me is the purpose of higher education is to get an education… or more precisely, to learn how to learn. Unfortunately, this answer is all too simplistic and deserves more attention and depth.

Rising costs of higher education have caused many to question the value of traditional degrees. This has been particularly true in recent years as graduates have struggled to find relevant work in their field of study. Certainly, there are fields where this is less of an issue, and we have seen placement rates rise in recent years, but it is still more challenging to start a career following college than it is to simply find a job… and a career is what graduates are seeking.

To justify the tuition and other costs associated with college, graduates are seeking to embark on a career and earn a living wage with enough resources to pay back their student loans. To be sure, I am not one who fully buys into the media hype regarding student loan debt. However, according to Forbes, the average student in the Class of 2016 graduated with $37,172 in student loan debt. But these numbers are somewhat skewed by the heavy debt load of some students. When you dig into the numbers, roughly 66% of borrowers owe less than $25,000 and 37% owe less than $10,000.

Now, before you post your angry response because you are a graduate who has borrowed significant amounts of money to pay for your education, I too am concerned with these rising numbers. I am simply making the point that rising costs, and the subsequent rising debt, should not alter one’s thinking about the purpose of higher education. It is still more about the learning than the job. But it does call into question one’s expectation when they enter college. Have we in higher education created an unrealistic expectation for both our students and the community of constituents who hire our students?

Practicality, not true learning, is becoming the norm so higher education institutions can confidently report meeting the needs of the workforce in communities across the nation. Designing degrees and creating programs that represent the local workforce has long been the purview of community and technical colleges, but now we are seeing state universities and private, liberal arts colleges jumping into the fray trying to beat the competition to the next great degree. And when you throw for-profit institutions into the mix, the dizzying array of degrees, programs and micro-credentials is almost alarming. Can higher education sustain this pace of change?

But all of this is an interesting discussion in the context of the purpose of higher education. In a 2016 report by the organization Imperative, it is suggested that the current generation of college students are more purpose-oriented than any previous generation. Not necessarily more driven to succeed or more intelligent, just more interested in pursuing learning defined by purpose rather than the traditional academic major. Generation Z students seem to understand the value of an education for the sake of learning. Of course, these students do not represent the majority attending college today, but wouldn’t it be interesting to transform our programs and curriculum to be more purpose-driven?

Historically, higher education has been focused on advancing knowledge and learning through faculty research. But this focus seems somewhat outdated with the growing population of post-traditional students who seek more relevancy and autonomy in their learning and the newest generation of students seeking purpose. The “sage on the stage,” who teaches what is relevant to them or their research, is fast-becoming a thing of the past; replaced by instructors who seek to teach and learn with their students. Discovering knowledge in creative ways is the new learning – both for students and instructors. Precisely defined learning outcomes and connecting students with real-world problems seems an exciting way to help students find relevancy and purpose. But we still think in terms of teaching and learning, a dichotomy that sets the instructor apart from the student. When I facilitate a class, I often learn as much as my students. I certainly have knowledge and experience to share, but so do the students. A vibrant learning environment allows this two-way exchange to occur.

I do buy into the idea that higher education should vigorously strive to develop in all parties a capacity for creation, change and innovation. This is consistent with my idea that the purpose of higher education is to prepare graduates to learn how to learn. When reading on this topic, I am often overwhelmed by the aggrandized language used to define this purpose. Language built around the idea of achieving the American Dream, diversity and inclusion, citizenship and democracy and other equally interesting, yet overstated ideas. Don’t misunderstand, I think these are all valuable outcomes of a college education and certainly central to social mobility and being productive members of our society. However, I think we over-promise and under-deliver. If we simplified (I know, this may come across as “dumbing it down”) our purpose to be clear and to-the-point, like learning how to learn, then does this not represent all the other articulated purposes out there? Would it not be more consistent with the relevancy and purpose our students are seeking?

Of course, we know that higher education is both knowledge and utility… seeking to educate and to prepare graduates for work. No longer is a college degree reserved for the elite, it is now open to anyone with the drive and ability to seek its opportunities. While much is written about access to higher education and the challenges many face in reaching this goal, I think there are increasingly more paths to a degree than ever before; there are certainly more paths to learning. Maybe the expectations we set as we recruit these students ought to be one of relevancy and purpose, not one of finding a job. If this were the case, students might be more comfortable choosing to start in a community college instead of the national research university. Imagine what this would do for access and student debt?