education

Maria Kefalas has written an interesting post at The Atlantic. She begins by relaying a phenomenon she heard immigration scholar Frank Bean discuss, pointing out the decrease in the number of native-born men who have completed the 12th grade while also noting the increase in the number of men enrolling in post-secondary education. Kefalas and Bean posit that immigrant men--mainly from Mexico--account for the discrepancy. On the ladder of social mobility, both black and white native men from the working class are going head-to-head at an increasing rate with the immigrant men, and the latter group is winning.

Why? Kefalas explains:

In this competition, immigrant men have the edge, not simply because they take lower wages and don't have union protection, but also because, as a group, they have lower rates of criminality and drug abuse--and that may become even more true as today's out-of-work blue collar workers remain out of work for a year or two or more. So as more and more native high-school-educated workers find themselves unemployed (and possibly become unemployable), Bean speculates that immigrant workers may fill the gap, and get many of the blue collar jobs that return, as we recover.

Kefalas, while noting her support of immigration and its societal benefits (which I also share), goes on to raise a concern regarding what this means for young native men who, out of options, look for some way to express their frustrations. The consequences of a large, downtrodden segment of the population recognizing their impotence would probably have enormously detrimental--possibly destructive--effects on society, especially when other complicating factors like race, ethnicity, and generational dynamics are thrown in (cue the footage of the London riots).

Kefalas sees the notion of "college-for-everyone" as a pipe dream doing a disservice to this group of native men; even as someone working in higher education, I tend to agree that college is not for everyone. Yet, school systems today won't hear any of this. Kefalas proposes her own solution.

Americans hate the idea of educational tracking, and I'm not proposing is a system that would give teachers and administrators all the power to determine a teenager's educational trajectory. But right now the only tracks are "college" or "bust." We need to provide alternative pathways for high school students, including those that would mix classroom learning with apprenticeship and applied-skill training.

What would be wrong with creating a system that honors a young person's dreams but also respects the practical concerns of a kid's abilities and talents? What purpose does it serve to tell a kid graduating from high school who tests below 9th-grade levels in math and English that he or she should head off to college to become a doctor?

No other system in the developed world would allow such a thing to happen. It wastes people's time, money, and resources. And it is soul-destroying for the young people who endure it. Foundations and philanthropists should be looking to programs like those in Germany where kids can finish the equivalent of high school (for free) with the training to enter the full-time labor force in a good job. Here, high school graduates end up in community colleges only to languish in remedial courses when they could be in trade and vocational programs preparing them for work that is respected, well-paying, and secure.

I mostly agree with Kefalas' proposal. I do believe that our educational system does a relatively poor job of preparing students for a variety of options not including college. One report from 2006, called "The Silent Epidemic: Perspectives of High School Dropouts" and released by Civic Enterprises in association with Peter D. Hart and Associates for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, cited a handful of reasons why high school students drop out. Two of the reasons are particularly interesting when thinking about the dilemma of young native men discussed above:

• Nearly half (47 percent) said a major reason for dropping out was that classes were not interesting. These young people reported being bored and disengaged from high school. Almost as many (42 percent) spent time with people who were not interested in school. These were among the top reasons selected by those with high GPAs and by those who said they were motivated to work hard.
• Nearly 7 in 10 respondents (69 percent) said they were not motivated or inspired to work hard, 80 percent did one hour or less of homework each day in high school, two-thirds would have worked harder if more was demanded of them (higher academic standards and more studying and homework), and 70 percent were confident they could have graduated if they had tried. Even a majority of those with low GPAs thought they could have graduated.

In addition to agreeing with Kefalas that more educational "tracks" may be needed, the statistics above also leave me wondering if part of the problem lies with the staffing of junior high and high school teachers. Are we hiring teachers whose experiences connect with these students? Are we providing educational experiences that match a variety of students' backgrounds, situating the learning in their worlds, or are we shoving the cliched square peg through the round hole in the name of efficiency and standardized testing? Granted, The Silent Epidemic statistics represent the experiences of both men and women, but they still hint that many of those young men leaving school experience significant boredom with their education. They, and we, deserve better.

Editor's note: This post originally appeared on Idealist.org. It has been republished here with permission from the author and Idealist.org.

Guest blogger Heather Jarvis provides education and training “for student loan borrowers and the people who love them.” Here she sums up what college students, recent graduates, and folks considering grad school need to know about the debt ceiling deal.

Last week the House and Senate passed the Budget Control Act of 2011 [PDF] just ahead of the deadline, and President Obama has signed the act into law. Key student aid programs are largely intact, and I am relieved to report that the new law avoids some of the proposed cuts that would have hurt students the most.

There are three main provisions in the debt ceiling deal related to higher education:

• Funding is provided for the Pell Grant program.
• The in-school loan interest subsidy for graduate and professional students is eliminated beginning July 1, 2012.
• "Repayment incentives," or cost reductions earned by certain borrowers, are eliminated for loans disbursed on or after July 1, 2012.

Now for some Q&A…

Q. Students shoulder $4.6 billion of the deficit reduction (so far)?! How is that possible?

The elimination of the graduate and professional interest subsidy and the loan repayment incentives are estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to produce a savings of $21.6 billion. $17 billion of that savings will go to shore up the Pell Grant program, and $4.6 billion will be used to reduce the deficit. Read on for more details about all of these changes.

Q. I have student loans. What steps should I take?

• Always borrow federal student loans first and only consider more expensive private student loans if you must.
• If you are still in school and you can afford it, consider paying student loan interest as it accrues.  You’ll lower your costs over time.
• Choose the repayment plan that makes the most sense for you. Income-Based Repayment (IBR) is a good option for people with low income compared to their student loan debt.
• Pay off your most expensive loans first.
• Find out if Public Service Loan Forgiveness can help.

Q. Is my Pell Grant safe?

Pell Grants are safe for now; the White House indicates that the funding will be sufficient to keep them at their current level of $5,500. If they  had been cut, students may well have had to increase their reliance on student loans. Thankfully, the Budget Control Act shores up the Pell Grant program by providing $17 billion in funding over the next two fiscal years. However, with spending cuts anticipated in the future, Pell Grants remain at risk.

Q. What should graduate and professional students expect?

Graduate and professional students will pay more for student loans. The Budget Control Act eliminates the in-school interest subsidy for graduate and professional students, so these folks will pay more interest over time.  However, it does not eliminate the interest subsidy for undergraduate borrowers.

Subsidized Stafford Loans have historically been available to both undergraduate and graduate borrowers with demonstrated financial need.  In the case of Subsidized Loans, the government pays the interest that accrues on the loan while the student is in college.  Without the subsidy, students must themselves pay the accruing interest as they go, or have the unpaid interest added to the principle amount of their loan and pay it later.

(Ed. note: You can learn more about financial aid on Idealist.org's financing your graduate education page.)

Q. What about repayment incentives?

To encourage borrowers to repay on time, the Department of Education was previously authorized to provide certain incentives, including an origination fee rebate and interest rate reduction.  Borrowers would earn these benefits by making on-time payments over 12 months.  Beginning on July 1, 2012, the Department of Education is no longer authorized to provide these repayment incentives, but may continue to allow an interest rate reduction for borrowers who enroll in payment by automatic electronic debit.

Q. Is it possible that there will be even more cuts to student aid?

Yes. The Budget Control Act requires Congress to come up with a lot more deficit reduction by Thanksgiving.  Additional spending cuts may come in part from higher education. Stay tuned…

—

About the author:

Former capital defense attorney and long-time public service advocate Heather Jarvis dedicates herself to helping students make informed decisions about their student loans. Since 2005, Heather has helped more than an estimated 25,000 students understand and overcome college debt through in-person and online trainings and resources. As Senior Program Manager for Advocacy and Outreach at Equal Justice Works, Heather played a role in the passage of the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, which made IBR and Public Service Loan Forgiveness a reality.

Want to learn more about Public Service Loan Forgiveness?  Register for one of Heather’s popular free webinars and get the scoop.  Heather provides free tools and information for student loan borrowers and the people who love them at www.askheatherjarvis.com.

Over the last few years, publications like Mother Jones and the New York Times magazine both have exposed us to the sugar daddy/baby phenomenon. Wealthy older men -- some married, some not -- plop their money down to entice young women to spend time with them, often with expectations of sexual activity.

However, as our economy has spiraled even further out of control, this activity is picking up steam. This past week we learned from the Huffington Post that the phenomenon has overlapped with the student debt crisis. The story describes several relationships borne out of economic strife and the desperation that accompanies the racking up of large amounts of debt to finance one's education. It also reveals that the increasing popularity of matchmaking sites like seekingarrangement.com have aided the sugar daddy/baby boom.

The Huffington Post piece spurred Bill Maher and his panel to discuss the issue last night.

The first thing that strikes me about this conversation is that it happened. We are so often saturated with positive portrayals of capitalism and what that economic system does for us (that whole American Dream thing) that when we hear personal accounts of the desperation it's wrought, our society -- particularly the establishment -- acts like it's some curious, extraordinary event. Now that the street economy is impacting elite college students, it's suddenly real and they are taken aback.

The second thing I am thinking about is the whole notion that American youth -- and Bourdain specifically mentions this at 5:15 -- just don't want to do jobs that they perceive as being below them. This narrative has been around a while, and it might be true of a certain demographic. But we're forgetting that most youth are in such a poor economic position right now that they simply can't live or survive on these jobs because they don't pay enough. And when there is a small number of other, barely better-paying jobs with benefits that are available, youth will hold out for those, even if they appear as a mirage on the horizon. And especially if they have the student debt that is simply no match for the low wage, no-health care jobs.

So, actually, the question Bourdain poses is unfair. "Why won't young people take jobs that are below them," should be rephrased: "Why won't young people take jobs that don't pay them enough?"

The question answers itself.

The sugar daddy/sugar baby phenomenon goes back to the need for (and absence of) well-paying jobs for young people. Imagine that.

You've probably seen a story the last few days regarding students' poor performance in American history. In fact, alarmingly, a national test showed that students are least proficient in American history than in any other subject.

This New York Times writeup explains:

American students are less proficient in their nation’s history than in any other subject, according to results of a nationwide test released on Tuesday, with most fourth graders unable to say why Abraham Lincoln was an important figure and few high school seniors able to identify China as the North Korean ally that fought American troops during the Korean War.

Over all, 20 percent of fourth graders, 17 percent of eighth graders and 12 percent of high school seniors demonstrated proficiency on the exam, the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Federal officials said they were encouraged by a slight increase in eighth-grade scores since the last history test, in 2006. But even those gains offered little to celebrate because, for example, fewer than a third of eighth graders could answer even a “seemingly easy question” asking them to identify an important advantage American forces had over the British during the Revolution, the government’s statement on the results said.

Of course, we can sit around and lob grenades at the students taking these exams, describing them as lazy, disappointing, and the like. But the real perpetrator here is our education system, which repeatedly spurns history and civics education in favor of the more rational science and math. No Child Left Behind has only accelerated this trend over the last decade.

History advocates contend that students’ poor showing on the tests underlines neglect shown to the subject by federal and state policy makers, especially since the 2002 No Child Left Behind act began requiring schools to raise scores in math and reading but in no other subject. The federal accountability law, the advocates say, has given schools and teachers an incentive to spend less time on history and other subjects.

“History is very much being shortchanged,” said Linda K. Salvucci, a history professor in San Antonio who is chairwoman-elect of the National Council for History Education.

Many teacher-education programs, Ms. Salvucci said, also contribute to the problem by encouraging aspiring teachers to seek certification in social studies, rather than in history. “They think they’ll be more versatile, that they can teach civics, government, whatever,” she said. “But they’re not prepared to teach history.”

Salvucci's point is interesting, especially given that I and others here have called for more civic education. Perhaps history is being shortchanged.

However, we should be careful to not view history as some static set of facts that need to be deposited into students' brains. History is a set of complicated lessons and problems that, unfortunately, aren't mined at all. In my experience, for example, high school history classes are too scared to touch anything after World War II for fear of parental rage over indoctrination and the like.

Yet, the complex nature of our problems these days--created by many of those who use this study as ammunition to attack youth--demand students who can sort through the messy stuff. Yes, funding is limited, and we have already committed to investing much of it in science, math, and reading, but history and civics are also more important than ever. And we simply can't afford to watch this area of our education atrophy.

Reprinted with permission from C. Cryn Johannsen at All Education Matters. This is a fantastic piece Sarah linked to earlier today; we wanted to make sure everyone saw it in its entirety.

Yesterday morning few people were aware of what had happened to Kenneth Wright's rights in Stockton, California. Thanks to the hard work of numerous advocates, however, that changed within hours of a local news story about the use of excessive force.

People across the country - and even the globe (my own work was being retweeted by people in Stockholm and London) - learned that Wright's door was broken down by federal agents, he was handcuffed in his underwear, and thrown into a patrol car for 6 hours. Although the initial report from News10 suggested that the warrant for Wright's estranged wife was for her defaulted federal loans, the story quickly changed over the course of the day. (News10 took the story down once it went viral and has provided an updated version that discusses the use of excessive force. There is no mention of defaulted loans. In addition, News10 released the warrant that indicates that fraud was being committed. However, it is truncated and the entire warrant remains sealed).

It is common knowledge among higher education finance experts that the Department of Education's Office of Inspector's General (OIG) conducts search warrants. Moreover, these cases, as Press Officer Sara Gast explained to me in a recent email, are generally related to investigations of "bribery, fraud, and embezzlement of federal student aid funds." Such investigations are generally limited, Gast told me, to 30 - 35 search warrants a year. But the general public is not privy to this type of activity. (When I followed up with Gast by phone, she provided me with Press Secretary Justin Hamilton's direct line. As of this writing, a call from Hamilton has not been returned).

While Wright's estranged wife may be involved in fraudulent activity, there are two crucial points about this unfolding story. First, it spread like wildfire throughout the blogosphere because it was fueled by fear. Bloggers on the left and the right picked up on the story, and that led to major media outlets putting out reports, too. There is good reason for why it became so hotly discussed. There is a growing number of indentured educated citizens who are fast approaching financial disaster. Thousands and thousands of them have shared their stories with me over the past 2 years. The use of force by the Department resonated with countless readers. Many of them wrote on Facebook pages and tweeted, "It's scary. What if that happened to me?" . . . "I'm close to defaulting on my loans. Will the Department break down my door?"

We all know that there is no way out of this debt, especially if you fall on hard times. The system has been rigged in such a way that allows companies, like Sallie Mae, to benefit from keeping people in debt. Sallie Mae has $146 billion of federal loans on its books. One analyst said, "They have this cash cow which is the legacy portfolio." Hear that, folks? They are making money off of indentured educated people! Make no mistake - they don't want this 'cash cow' to go away. No one talks about the fact that FFELP is still alive. The administration might have put an end to it, but those loans are still out there and part of these loan sharks' portfolios. So, if you default on any federal loans, you're life is pretty much ruined, whereas the IRS has the power to resolve issues with distressed taxpayers. Both parties can come up with a solution and move on. Student debtors have no such luck. But since we're seen as a 'cash cow,' why would anyone in power want that to change? I'm sure those guys over at Sallie Mae, who live in luxurious mansions on the east coast don't want this to change. Neither do the schools. They all control the money, whereas the rest of us are victims of these hucksters. But I digress.

Second, the use of such excessive force was uncalled for. Why an individual who is being sought for fraud warrants a SWAT team -- as it was originally reported -- suggests how far right this country has moved. Wright must have been traumatized when he was handcuffed in his underwear and thrown into a patrol car for 6 hours. His children, who are 3, 7, and 11, had to have been disturbed by the incident as well.

Moreover, this story has fueled numerous and ongoing conspiracy theories. But the elements of the story, along with a great deal of speculation (which was justified), lent themselves to that. It should come as no surprise since the characteristics of American conspiracy theorists are the same as Christian fundamentalists. Fear is also what adds fuel to conspiracy theorists' fire. (They also the need to simplify complex situations. In addition, conspiracy theorists oftentimes - not always - fail to comprehend systemic issues and place too much emphasis on individual agency. Mind you, I am not suggesting that conspiracy theorists are unintelligent, but I do wish to make clear that I do not identify with this type of thinking).

One thing is clear, regardless of how you think or how you identify yourself politically, the Department is tone deaf and reviled across the board. They are as hated, as I've already stated, as Sallie Mae. I had always thought that, but yesterday's outrage drove that home. If they don't get it together, along with the politicians and self-interested lobbyists in DC, we might very well experience a revolution in this country as well. People don't like it when they feel that their future has been stolen from them. A lot of folks want their future back. DC better start listening . . .

We know what democracy means. We won't settle for economic slavery.

• New Grads adapt to Job Market Realities is a piece Judy Woodruff posts for PBS's New Hour.
  

  "Reports have shown that for the past couple years that they have joined the older generation in taking a hit. A large number have moved back home with their parents after graduation; another large percentage have had to settle for lower paying jobs, or for jobs in fields outside their area of main interest. It’s too early to know what this means for their confidence in the future, but studies show that getting a late start on the job of one’s choice - and starting at a lower salary level - often means lower total earnings over the course of a career because of the difficulty in playing catch-up.

  There’s also the question commonly asked of Baby Boomers: do you think your children and their generation will do as well as you have? Lately, the answer has been “no” - not surprising given the weakness of the recovery. But I found this pessimistic view may have deeper roots than the current economy: A national poll reported by NBC News in July 2006, well before the financial collapse, reported that nearly two-thirds of American adults that year didn’t believe life for their children's generation would be better than it had been for them." Go read the rest

• Study saying debt is "rewarding" to youth high on BS radar. If you missed it yesterday - the study that everyone is reporting on is 1. out of date and 2. not reflective on anxieties youth face when they're not economically stable. Don't be fooled...
• SWAT Team raid for "unpaid student loans" not the full story but fools journalists across the country. We weren't the only ones who got owned. The Department of Education released a statement saying that they don't issue warrants for defaulted student loans but instead for criminal actions. Since this is an ongoing criminal investigation ... Ed can't comment further. Until then loads of our people will sleep knowing that The Man isn't going to break down the door for student loan payments.

Actually one of the best commentaries on this whole topics has come form Cryn Johannsen - which I encourage you to read.

• Students crushed by high interest rates. Doesn't make the anxieties any better that a SWAT team won't come repelling through the windows all Mission Impossible style...

  For example ... did you know that if you can't pay your student loan and you're under a mountain of debt and you file for bankruptcy that it doesn't matter you still have to pay your student loan back?

  "Rules put in place about 13 years ago under changes to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act put student debt on par with unpaid child support and court settlements based on crimes you may have committed.

  "They are putting student loans up there with criminal behaviour,” says Carleton University professor Saul Schwartz, who has studied the issue for years and says about 12% to 15% of student loans will never get repaid. That’s about double the rate of the general population, he says.

  It’s no easy route for a student to go bankrupt because of changes to the act in 1998. Up until then, student debt was no different from any other kind of debt and completely forgiven once there was a bankruptcy discharge.

  But the act was changed to say you had to wait 10 years after leaving school before you could apply to have your student debt forgiven. That was lowered to seven years in 2008.

  "There is no good reason why student loans should be treated differently than any other loan," says Prof. Schwartz, adding that even taxes are forgiven by the government in a bankruptcy. "That’s the basic point that should be made.”

• On a lighter note... Study: Minority youth spend more than half their day consuming media.
  

  "Asian and Hispanic youth are particularly avid social networkers"

  I'm sure there's a joke I could make about our fellow FM blogger Karlo on here, but I'm too busy consuming media to think about it...

• Risky Behaviors more common among LGB youth. Risky behaviors include such things as Glee, excessive media consumption, attraction to flair, and obviously sarcasm. Kidding... Risky behaviors are categorized by the CDC below. The piece doesn't include the extent to which these so called "risky" behaviors are done by non-LGB students. (editor note: The CDC did have numbers (PDF) - but this article doesn't - lame.
  

  "
  1. behaviors that contribute to unintentional injuries
  2. behaviors that contribute to violence
  3. behaviors related to attempted suicide
  4. tobacco use
  5. alcohol use
  6. other drug use
  7. sexual behaviors
  8. dietary behaviors
  9. physical activity and sedentary behaviors
  10. weight management

  "

• OK back to the money thing... here are some Steps to make good on a defaulted student loan. Might I also suggest selling internal organs - perhaps even a sibling. And if that doesn't work here's another: In Student Loan hell? Here's how to get out
• Interest rates on student loans: when things get fishy. Everyone is out to get you. No seriously... everyone is out to get you... but primarily for your money. The Christian Science Monitor tells us:
  

  Interest rates can change when consolidating private and subsidized loans. Be sure to have the consolidation and the interest rates documented.

• For profit colleges actively manage stats to keep federal dollars flowing, internal documents show. See.. I told you everyone is out to get your money.... And these guys will do whatever it takes to make sure they get students' money and federal tax dollars.
• Florida voting systems suck for youth. Congratulations Florida!!! You still suck! Stay tuned for Craig's full report on Rock the Vote's ranking of of states and their voting systems impact on young voters.
• And I saved the best for last!! How the Next US Economy is Already Failing
  

  "Indeed, things might look a hell of a lot worse for everybody, precisely because of the inequity that remains baked in. Stokely Baksh’s infographic showed last week that today’s graduates stride into a job market that is smaller than it has been in generations. Meanwhile, youth unemployment is higher than it’s been since economists began tracking it, with black and Latino young people of all education levels lagging far behind whites in their ability to get a job. The next generation, in all its diversity, faces a difficult future.

  I explored that difficult future in more depth in a special section of this month’s National Journal, which focuses on “The Next Economy.” In my essay, I explain that, regardless of the Millennials’ diversity, they exist inside an economy that continues to disadvantage people of color. I write,

  The pressing question, however, is how many of these young people will truly join the middle class. Will they reap the benefits of their parents’ labor and achieve an economic security that enables them to buy homes, start businesses, and take road trips even with gasoline at $4 a gallon? This is where the complexities of America’s racial politics, past and present, cloud the way."

Have a good day everybody....

When I saw this article was posted by Amanda Fairbanks at Huffington Post I immediately turned my head and thought…. surly this can't be true. I'm in debt - I've been in debt since college - both credit cards and student loans. (I was irresponsible) My debt has prevented me from taking jobs I wish I could take because I can't afford them. It's prevented me from doing a lot of things like traveling the world (a dream of mine), going to law school (a previous dream of mine), and grown up things like … not moving states every year or so because I'm looking for a new or higher paying job or better benefits. I know I'm not alone.

Surly - SURELY those other young people out there wouldn't see this as a good thing. And certainly this wouldn't be something that would increase someone's self esteem?! I saw a great documentary on CNBC about students in debt that can't sleep at night and sob on camera because they feel so lost and afraid.

Via Fairbanks piece:

""Debt can be a good thing for young people -- it can help them finance goals they couldn’t otherwise, like a college education,” said Dwyer, whose findings appear in the latest issue of Social Science Research, an academic journal."

When looking up information on this study I found that you had to pay $31.50 to the damn Social Science Research magazine er research book or whatever just to see the methodology behind the survey. I put it on a credit card…. Email me if you want a free copy I'll give you mine....

Here's what I learned on page 732 under the "Data and Methods" section.

"We use multiple years of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 – Young Adults sample (NLSY79-YA) up to 2004 to evaluate the impact debt holding has on youth during a time of high credit use. The NLSY is administered biannually by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Young Adults sample is made up of the children of female respondents of the 1979 NLSY cohort…..

We limit our sample to youth at least 18 years of age, who are not in high school, and are responsible for at least some of their financial obligations to ensure that all respondents included in the analysis were eligible to access credit, resulting in a sample of 3079 respondents. The age range for this group is from 18 to 34, but the majority of the respondents are in their early to mid-twenties, with a median of 22 years and 80% aged 25 or younger. We control for age in all analyses and conduct supplemental analyses stratified by age, which we discuss further in the results section."

So, how do you rank good or bad self-esteem?

"…The Pearlin Mastery Scale is composed of seven items intended to assess respondents’ sense of control over their life: ability to solve problems in life, feeling pushed around or bullied, amount of control they have in their every- day lives, ability to do what they set their minds to, amount of helplessness when dealing with everyday problems, sense of control over what happens in the future, and ability to change important things that happen in their lives (Pearlin and Schooler, 1978). The alpha value for the mastery scale is .68. The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale includes ten items to assess respondent self worth: I am a person of worth; I have a number of good qualities; I am inclined to feel I am a failure; I am as capable as others; I feel I do not have much to be proud of; I have a positive attitude; I am satisfied with myself; I wish I had more self-respect; I feel useless at times; and I sometimes think I am no good at all (Rosenberg, 1989). The alpha value for the self-esteem scale is .83. Measures were coded so that a higher value indicates greater mastery or self-esteem."

I take issue with this - because I'm satisfied with myself, I have done a lot I can be proud of, and I don't feel like a failure - but I feel a lot of anxiety around my debt and I've made decisions based on that debt. Yet by this classification system I would have high self-esteem around my debt. That's not exactly a great methodology...

Here's the kicker from page 733

"Because many respondents have no debt, we create spline functions for both education debt and credit-card debt. The spline splits each form of debt into two component variables: (1) a dummy variable indicating whether the respondent has any debt, and (2) a continuous measure of the total debt held with zeros for non-debt holders. The simultaneous esti- mation of the effects of these two variables models debt more accurately than a simple linear function, enables us to distin- guish the effect of having any debt from the effect of having more or less debt, and reduces the bias due to the skew of the underlying debt variables (Wojtkiewicz, 2003)"

Seriously? No….. seriously?

First of all - those who graduated between the years 1979-2004 are probably not in debt anymore! The only people I can see who MIGHT still be in debt would be people who graduated in the last 10 years with their BA and didn't get an advanced degree. Graduates in 2004 had an average rate of 66.4%. Debt keeps going up....

"About a decade year before that, it was less than half who had student loans to pay back. Also over that past decade, the debt levels for graduating seniors with student loans more than doubled from $9,250 to $19,200, which is an 108% increase."

Secondly, that dollar amount also has increased. In 2004 that number of debt was $17,600. Today that number is closer to $25,000 asFairbanks quotes.

So, essentially - a majority of these people had lower amounts of debt than today - have had more time to pay off that debt, and graduates prior to 2004 weren't being hit with the economic recession that we've been dealing with for the last since even 2006 and 2007.

This whole study seems remarkably out of touch with TODAY's youth who are saddled with high costs of education, high unemployment, predatory lending, and the Department of Education's SWAT team coming after them for loan defaults.

I call this a BS study for those reasons. I don't think it's helpful to try and pretend that young people are positive about being poor, in debt, jobless, and without health care. It does a serious disservice to economic or education policy and to those of us who do advocacy around youth or economic issues for young people.

• Recommendations for when college grads move back into the family home
• Top 10 cities for college grads. This was ranked by Livability.com who focuses on the places in between the big cities.
• When college doesn't go as planned go non-trad says a younger man who had to drop out of college because he couldn't afford the high tuition. Years later when he's going back he discusses what it is to be a non-trad student.
• #1 Wish of College Grads: Health Insurance. I'd also say that another wish is for... I don't know... a job?
  

  "According to a recent eHealthInsurance (EHTH) survey, only 31% of college grads have health insurance coverage through a parent's policy or their own plan paid for by their parents, despite a recent law that gives parents the option to keep kids on their policy until age 26.

  Not all parents are willing to take advantage of the law. Almost 40% of parents surveyed said they won't keep their adult children on their health insurance plans until age 26. Only 43% said they'd be willing to keep adult children under age 26 on their policies if they could do so without additional costs.

  This has led to many recent college grads rethinking their priorities. 93% of those surveyed said they'd be willing to give up dining out, movies, or a trip to Starbucks if it meant they could afford health insurance.

  74% of recent college graduates surveyed also said they'd rather live at home for the first year after college, if it's a choice between having health insurance or living on their own without it. 49%, say they'd take a job they didn't like if it offered health insurance or a retirement account."

• Surviving Home After College. Here are some tips. My personal favorite was don't lounge around the pool all day "try to find some time every day to devote to your job search." Ya think?
• Youth disabilities come from psychological disorders:
  

  "For youth, neuropsychiatric disorders including major depression and alcohol use comprise 45% of the disability burden among young people from 10 to 24 years old, according to a study published online Monday in the Lancet."

• Similarly - Mental Health top health issue for youth:

"Mental health problems are the leading cause of disability among children, teens and young adults worldwide, according to a new study.

Researchers who analyzed global data collected in 2004 found that neuropsychiatric disorders -- including depression, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and alcohol use -- accounted for 45 percent of the disease burden among those 10 to 24 years old.

The next two most common causes of disability among young people were accidental injuries, most often caused by traffic accidents, at 12 percent, and infectious and parasitic diseases at 10 percent."

• Young people saving for pensions too late - says this one. Perhaps its because we have student loan debt and we're afraid the Department of Education will deploy a SWAT team to come in and throw us to the ground... I don't know... I could be wrong...
• Youth attitudes toward the Ryan Medicare cuts. This one I got from Matt Singer at the Bus Project who remarked it was interesting. I think this is a reflection that the people who oppose the Ryan budget are obviously not messaging or even communicating their policies to young voters....

"Awareness is particularly low among younger Americans – fully 41% of adults under 30, and 34% of those ages 30-49, have heard nothing at all about this proposal. And politically, Democrats are more likely than Republicans to say they have heard a lot about this proposal (26% vs. 16%).

"The lack of awareness goes a long way toward explaining some of the contradictory views many Americans hold on this issue. In particular, people under age 30 are the only major demographic group in which significantly more say they favor (46%) than oppose (28%) this proposed change."

Some quick hits for you as we head into the weekend (or, perhaps, just the end).

• A Washington Post piece asks if college is worth it
• Ezra Klein flags a graphic showing the percentage of recent college grads with jobs, by major.
  

  

• Speaking of college, here are ten reasons to get pumped for life following graduation.
• Nebraska's 4H organization and the YMCA team up to offer youth entrepreneur classes. An interesting partnership and initiative.
• CBS writes up the story we covered yesterday regarding Rockefeller's belief that young people are morally hollow. (Apparently 13 more people like him on Facebook between yesterday and today.)
• New Hampshire is aging.
• The Pope knows what's up--at least regarding the wisdom of listening to young people.
• Two young candidates in the Harrisburg, Pennsylvania area won primaries this week.
• Young Canadian city council candidate links young people to the local community.
• UK developing youth "underclass"
• The government: Just say no to sexting.
• Young people afraid to call themselves feminists.
• When will the GOP realize they are on the wrong side of history?

For years Future Majority has reported, and reported, and reported and reported, on the ever increasing cost of education, however substandard that education may be for the return on investment.

Last night CNBC ran its special The Price of Admission about what they are calling the student debt crisis in America.

Several things struck me as interesting - I actually watched it twice I was so shocked national media was giving attention to this story. First, the raw numbers that CNBC says show the average amount of credit card debt students have, has now eclipsed the average amount of student loan debt and the number of people that owe student loan debt amounts to over $1 TRILLION dollars in the US.

In the past several years, safeguards have gone in place to protect youth from unfair and predatory credit card practices. Campus card recruiters that give out free t-shirts, posters, pizza, etc... to youth for applying for credit cards have been banned by many colleges and the media attention alone has hopefully encouraged parents and students to get the facts on high interest rate credit cards. Similarly, Congress enacted regulations that prevent credit card companies from giving credit cards to anyone under the age of 18. These kinds of tactics have obviously helped curb the credit card debt problems of the Millennial Generation, but comparably less has been done to help when it comes to student loans.

Secondly, the report interviewed Iowa Senator Tom Harkin who has been on the front lines of both college affordability and questioning the lack of regulations on for-profit colleges. As recently as September Harkin held hearings on these kinds of education institutions asking why the federal government subsidizes them when so many youth are unable to find work and so many of their students fall into loan defaults.

"I certainly agree that, at their best, for-profit colleges offer a valuable alternative model for higher education. But this Committee’s ongoing investigation has brought to light disturbing practices that appear to be systemic to this industry, and that raise serious questions about the enormous taxpayer investment in these schools," Harkin said this fall.

Harkin's committee reported findings from an investigation by the Government Accountability Office which visited "15 campuses of 12 companies and found misleading, deceptive, overly aggressive or fraudulent practices at every one of those campuses." Not just one or two... but all of them.

The CNBC report shows footage from the GAO with financial aid councilors using every means necessary to avoid questions about loans, cost, or alternative solutions for funding to "get" students to enroll in their colleges. A whistle blower who previously worked for a for-profit college was interviewed quoting nearly the same script as the GAO investigation video and revealed that "councilors" were trained to be more emotional with their prospective student - truthfully it was more emotional manipulation to get the student to enroll and further accept large interest loans. The young man said that he was instructed to "check up" on students to make sure things were going well for 14 days after the loan was signed because regulations allow two weeks for the student to cancel and the colleges want to keep the students on the hook. The for-profit colleges disagree with the whistle-blower saying they check up on students as an act of good faith.

Harkin's most interesting statement was his opinion that the student loan crisis will become the next housing crisis. And the most alarming part of the report was the striking detachment, disinterest, and cluelessness from Education Secretary Arnie Duncan who seems more insistent in getting kids enrolled in college than promoting personal financial responsibility and financial stability for the generations graduating into the unstable job market.

Interspersed with heartbreaking accounts of students who can't afford to make payments, a young married couple who will pay over a quarter of a million dollars in interest on their loans, and parents who must pay for loans their deceased son took out for his education, the report shows no clear solutions, path, or even political will to solve the problem (aside from Sen. Harkin). If Harkin is correct and this is to be the next housing bubble, if the new conservative Congress is intent on financial responsibility, where then is their concern and what is their plan?