Objective Evaluation

No different than many of my peers, I have strong feelings on many issues. Some are well grounded in fact; others are “gut reactions” on a much more emotional level. Likely, my evaluations, opinions and judgments reflect my values, which impact their objectivity.

When I purchase products, I look for the most highly rated product at the best price possible with the greatest reliability. And where I look first is Consumer Reports (CR). I have been reading and relying on CR for decades; I am a lifetime subscriber; and I am as impressed today as I was when I first started reading CR decades ago. The only major change in my CR reading habits is that I glance at the magazine when it arrives, but I do my research using the online version.

Consumer Reports has not been thrilled by many American cars over the years; Japanese and German cars prevail here and I think their judgment has been accurate. Most car magazines have more widely different results but the objectivity is often compromised with ratings that give significant points to styling or the fun factor or some other intangible way of skewing results. Often, the difference between first and last in the typical car magazine is directly tied to these somewhat subjective standards. I don’t need or want a magazine to make style evaluations for me; I’ll do that myself. What I need is a full evaluation of ride, handling, acceleration, gas mileage, reliability and safety results. Here CR delivers and delivers well.

New cars have come and new cars have gone and the ratings in CR for American cars are consistently in the fair to middling group; that is until now. The new Chevrolet Impala has just been evaluated and is now rated as the top large size car by CR joining the highly acclaimed ranks of cars such as Audi and Infiniti.

In evaluating the Impala CR stated that “with its 2014 redesign, the Chevrolet Impala has been dramatically transformed from a woefully uncompetitive and outdated model—one that was to be avoided even as a free upgrade at the rental-car counter—into a thoroughly modern and remarkably enjoyable car.” CR continues by noting that “This phoenix like rise has propelled it from the bottom of our large-sedan ratings to being one of the top-scoring cars we’ve tested overall. . . . and in the process, it’s now reclaimed a stature befitting such a classic nameplate.” In addition to the terrific write up, Impala received 95 out of 100 possible points and was ranked higher than upscale sedans from everyone including Acura, Lexus, Toyota, Hyundai, and Nissan.

I supported the government bailout of General Motors and of Chrysler. They were each effectively given a new lease on life and both, as well as Ford, are doing a great job utilizing the opportunity. Our industry and our products can compete effectively with the best. What a terrific change for American automobiles. Now if the industry can resist taking the consumer for granted, which I am convinced caused some of the earlier difficulties, American automobiles should continue to thrive. This is a good lesson for all of us to remember in industry as well as in education.

The $10,000 Degree

I am a huge fan of Consumer Reports and consider them the most objective source of product information available anywhere. Rarely do I ever purchase a product without first checking their evaluation. So when it comes to buying or leasing a car, I look in detail at the ratings of the type of car I am interested in and able to afford. But since I am also a car person, I can’t resist looking at the ratings in general. On a scale of 0-100, there are cars in the 90s, which are top rated, and there are cars in the 30s, which are little more than basic transportation. The cars with the higher ratings often, though not exclusively, are more expensive; the cars with the lower ratings are often, but not exclusively, lower priced. I am tempted to give actual examples but I am certain that Consumer Reports is familiar enough to the Inside Higher Education readership that no specifics are necessary.

A highly ranked car or a poorly ranked car will get you to the same place often at the same time (assuming everyone follows legal speed limits). Likewise, a highly priced car and a low priced car will also get you to the same place at the same time. The same analogy holds for the $10,000 degree and the $30,000 a year tuition charge. Offering a bachelor’s degree for $10,000 is certainly doable and I feel confident that on standardized objective tests, the results could be very similar and possibly identical to higher cost degree programs. But is the product really the same?

What will the $10,000 degree look like? A MOOC tied to recitation sections at another college is one likely alternative. You can get thousands of students into the MOOC and recitation sections could perhaps reach up to a hundred students each. The lead faculty could be a well known expert and a fascinating lecturer. The recitation section could be taught by a person whose qualifications are much less high powered. MOOCs are typically free, at least up to now, so the cost incurred by the credit granting institutions (which may just consist of the recitation leaders’ compensation) could be minimal. Please understand, this is not what I advocate but it is a workable model for a low priced degree.

Large lecture sections provide another alternative for a lower cost degree. Five hundred students in a lecture class certainly moderates the cost equation. But is this the same education that a student receives in a 30 student class? Are the important extras also there? Would there be advisement, counseling, career services, other support services, sports, faculty with sufficient time to meet with students, co-curricular activities, an attractive campus, etc.? Not likely – there is just so much you can do for a very low price.

What is better? The value proposition of a $10,000 degree or the much more personalized education which a $30,000 annual tuition charge is likely to deliver? For some students, it may not matter. Their skill set and their comprehension of the material is such that to a significant degree they can teach themselves. But there are many other students that need guidance and support to succeed. They have the potential to succeed beyond expectations but not without the safety net of individualized attention and support services. As college continues to be the economic ticket to success for so many of our students we need to work to both not lose accessibility while at the same time making sure we meet the diverse and not insubstantial needs of many of our students. As attractive as a $10,000 price tag may be for higher education, it is fairly certain to not meet the needs of many in our society. Think about it; who is likely to gravitate toward this minimal cost degree? Will it be those who don’t have the economic resources to pursue a more enriched education? How will their support service needs be met? And if this minimalist degree doesn’t meet those needs what happens to their chance to succeed?