Does It Have To Be College?
This article is a sidebar to “The Old College Try,” Philanthropy, spring 2010.
The weight of philanthropic (and elite) opinion rests on the idea that college is necessary for success in modern American life—and for many, college means a four-year degree. The dialogue is changing somewhat—see, for example, the rise of the more inclusive goal of a “high-quality post-secondary credential” and more support for community colleges—but not enough for some. Critics of this ideal include Charles Murray (in his widely discussed Real Education) and Matthew Crawford (in his best-selling Shop Class as Soulcraft). Moreover, some donors are frustrated at the lingering bias toward four-year degrees and against vocational or career-focused training.
Andrew Grove, the former CEO of Intel, argues that to make the four-year degree the standard is to erect a “ladder to the sun,” when many people would be happy with “a ladder to a middle-class existence.”
Grove conducted an informal survey of philanthropic higher ed initiatives in the San Francisco Bay area. “Every single program . . . emphasizes four-year college,” he says. He took a different approach. Continue reading “Does It Have To Be College?”