by Robin Beres

In May 2021, The Harvard Business Review featured a column by Michael Hansen, CEO of Cengage Learning titled, “The U.S. Education System Isn’t Giving Students What Employers Need.”

Hansen argued that today’s education system is not equipping students “with the skills and capabilities to prepare for a career where they can obtain financial stability.”

It’s no secret the pandemic drastically upended the American workforce. After millions of workers lost their jobs and were sent home, they began to appreciate the value of downtime and a stress-free lifestyle. So much so that many of those newly-unemployed were reluctant to return to the nine-to-five grind.

Businesses, anxious to be up and running again, have been desperate to get warm bodies back on their payrolls and in the office. Many CEOs have come to realize that degree-inflation — requiring an often-unnecessary bachelor’s degree for entry- and mid-level positions — has been a barrier to bringing on good, hard-working men and women.

These types of jobs can include well-paying positions such as regional managers, supervisors, support specialists, administrative workers, and countless others. While a kid right out of high school may not have the skills necessary for many of these jobs, someone who has worked in the field for five or 10 years or more usually has picked up the qualifications necessary to do the work well.

Last week, Gov. Glenn Youngkin joined six other state governors in a trend that began last year when he announced that the Old Dominion will no longer require college degrees for nearly 90 percent of state government jobs. It will also no longer give higher preference to degree holders. Every year, Virginia state agencies advertise more than 20,000 job openings.

In a press release, Youngkin said:

On day one we went to work reimagining workforce solutions in government and this key reform will expand opportunities for qualified applicants who are ready to serve Virginians. This landmark change in hiring practices for our state workforce will improve hiring processes, expand possibilities and career paths for job seekers and enhance our ability to deliver quality services.

And in a follow-on statement, Secretary of Labor Bryan Slater added:

We have opened a sea of opportunity at all levels of employment for industrious individuals who have the experience, training, knowledge, skills, abilities, and most importantly, the desire to serve the people of Virginia.

This is a very good move. Eliminating the degree requirement allows employers to focus on an applicant’s skill level and other competencies. Degree-requirements often automatically eliminate many promising and talented candidates who couldn’t afford college or for some other reason chose to go straight into the workforce from high school. Many of those who don’t have degrees are minorities — and this opens up thousands of well-paying positions to talented workers from all walks of life. Also, consider that a non-degree-holding, skilled applicant may have a far better work ethic than a newly-graduated college student. Let’s hope the trend continues and spreads to the private workforce.

Of course, not everyone is happy with this Youngkin decision. Colleges and universities must be concerned about the potential loss of students once people realize they don’t need to go into debt for thousands of dollars simply to land a mid-level career.

Following the governor’s announcement, City University of New York professor and journalist Jeff Jarvis tweeted, “They hate education because the educated know better than to vote for them.”

Really? If there were an award for the most churlish tweet of the year, Jarvis would be in the running. Snarky comments aside, most people believe that this is a commonsense move, including President Barack Obama, who in March said the movement was a “smart policy that gets rid of unnecessary college degree requirements and reduces barriers to good paying jobs. I hope other states follow suit!”

It will be interesting to watch what happens as the new policies take effect in Virginia, Maryland, Alaska, Utah, and Pennsylvania.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

30 responses to “Deflating Degree Inflation”

  1. M. Purdy Avatar
    M. Purdy

    I agree with Gov. Youngkin on this point, and with the overall point of the article. Secondary education is ripe for disruption, and we’re seeing the first wave of that now. Employers are deeply unimpressed with college grads, even from top schools, who lack the skills and toughness to make it in the private sector. This is a solid move.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      AI could be devastating to the underemployed college graduates. CADCAM and robotics was supposed to devastate the standing manufacturing and factory jobs, and it did, but it replaced those 8-hour/day nut tightening jobs with higher paid machine servicing. Not one-to-one, mind you, but higher skilled.

      “I can’t work! Dammit, I’m trained to think!”

  2. Teddy007 Avatar
    Teddy007

    Considering that K-12 education is such a high portion of state and local government budgets, where did the 90% claim come from. Or did the state push K-12, higher education, engineering, and public health out of the system.

    Does anyone really want to work for a health department, a university, or a public schools where the administrators are not college educated.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      The K-12 positions are not state employees. Youngkin’s announcement applies only to the state executive branch. (I wonder if higher ed is being exempted, as often happens.)

  3. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    This is one of those announcements that sounds good and makes the governor look good. In the end, however, it is likely to have very little substantive effect.

    To begin with, the claim that “the Old Dominion will no longer require college degrees for nearly 90 percent of state government jobs” sounds impressive until one realizes that most state jobs do not currently require a college degree. The two agencies with the most number of authorized positions are the Dept of Corrections (13,301) and VDOT (7,748). The last time I checked, there were more than 7,000 correctional officers in DOC and those positions do not require a college degree. After you add in administrative assistants, fiscal techs, and other support positions, you probably have around 10,000 positions (75 percent) that do not require a college degree. A similar case likely could be made out for VDOT.

    I would guess that, after one takes into account all the support positions in state agencies, 60-70 percent of all state positions do not require a college degree.

    For those positions for which agencies will have to drop a college degree as a requirement, those candidates with college degrees will have a much better chance of getting selected. People who were shut out at the beginning for some positions will be get their names in the pool and they may make it through the screening process, but I have been on enough hiring interview panels to know that, unless someone without a college degree has a ton of relevant experience, an applicant with a college degree will get the job. In scoring or ranking applicants, members of an interview panel may not be allowed to explicitly penalize the non-degree candidates, but in scoring on “education or experience”, the college degree will loom large.

    I doubt if the administration has conducted a study to determine what percentage of state positions require a college degree. If it has, that could be the baseline to use in five years to gauge the effect of this “landmark change”.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      “… unless someone without a college degree has a ton of relevant experience, an applicant with a college degree will get the job.”

      And that, you see, will still keep the pressure on.

      But, with 60% of undergraduates (even greater in post grad) being of the fairer sex, the face of management will start to change very quickly.

      1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
        Dick Hall-Sizemore

        The change started long ago.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          With luck our sons may experience a glass ceiling.

          I saw an article “Artificial Intelligence Poses an Existential Threat”. OTOH, no intelligence is an existential threat. I’m thinking the culture wars and ingrained culture, i.e., traditiion, as a substitute for thought. The less a man understands about his surroundings, the more he relies on the gods.

          1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            “With luck our sons may experience a glass ceiling.”

            That is perhaps the strangest comment I have seen in this space.

            Ever.

            Amid fierce competition.

          2. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Both Artificial Intelligence and No Intelligence are likely to decide the rest of us are existential baggage. Think HAL and Pol Pot respectively.

          3. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Back in the early 80s I had the luck to attend a talk given by a fellow who was given a $50K grant to travel to various companies and labs to “gather intel” on Neural Nets, the earliest computational throes with AI.

            Most of the applications were in control systems; using neural nets to replace models.

            One of the places he visited was JPL where they were developing an automatic landing system.

            Their biggest problem? Sometimes, the control system decided landing inverted was best.

            I almost forgot. His conclusion and title were the same, “Neural Nets, the 2nd best way to do almost everything.”

          4. James C. Sherlock Avatar
            James C. Sherlock

            The Navy landed the first operational aircraft automatically, hands free, on an aircraft carrier in 1970. It was an F-4 from my squadron. All of our airplanes were equipped out of the McD factory. The system was the Automated Carrier Landing System (ACLS). It worked fine the first time and every time it was used.

            The system was so accurate that every hook point landed at virtually the same spot on the flight deck (F-4 hooks weighed 800 pounds).

            After our trials, the designers actually had to program dispersion into the system to keep from damaging the flight deck. It still landed the plane safely and with a high LSO landing grade every single time.

            So I don’t know what JPL did in the 80’s, but that part of the technology was mature.

          5. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Did it work for night landings too? They always seemed to me to be the most likely to be anxiety producing.

          6. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            I should think it would be easier. If you could see what’s about to happen…

          7. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            ALS had been around for a good while. Hell, the Shuttle used ALS on its first flight. Pinpoint perfect.

            It was replacing the ODE modeling with neural network architecture – a real “black box”.

            When you’re trying something new, it’s always good to do it on something you know works. You have something with which to compare.

          8. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            There was a USAF report last week on a simulation of an AI run system to destroy SAM sites with a human in the loop to order fire/no fire.

            Occasionally the operator said “no fire”. The AI figured out that lowered its “score” and killed the operator. USAF added a rule that killing the operator radically lowered the score. The AI then destroyed the antenna the operator used to communicate “no fire” to the AI system.

            Comes under the heading of “what could go wrong?” AI is profoundly scary. Us livewares are toast when AI starts writing its own programs. It won’t be long before we get there, the learning curve will bend right straight up and it’ll be lights out for us.

          9. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Well, apparently some lawyers using ChatGPT to research precedent cases submitted a brief citing 6 nonexistent cases.

            Be afraid, be very afraid.

  4. VaPragamtist Avatar
    VaPragamtist

    I read last week’s press release; I can’t remember a time where I felt more personally insulted by a press release.

    I’m a state employee with over a decade of “real world” experience, a bachelor’s, and a master’s degree. I understand the value of each. I also understand the limitations of each. I remember the person I was before being exposed to higher education. I came out a completely different, more confident person, with the soft skills of networking, understanding differences, researching, making strong arguments, and so on.

    Then I worked and learned the ins-and-outs of industry. I personally invested in my own education to become better at what I do, learn the deeper skills and theory–the why behind what we do in government.

    I could be in the private sector, but I choose public service. And now GY is telling us that education doesn’t matter.

    It’s one thing if the new policy mirrors federal hiring practices: a bachelor’s degree or equivalent years in experience. . .a master’s degree or equivalent years in experience. . .while setting guidelines for hiring managers that define equivalent years in experience. But the press release showed no indication that that will happen.

    Like all of the half-baked policies his DC consultant-filled office comes up with, it sounds great on paper but it lacks thought in the details. But after a year and a half of this aloof administration, it’s what I’ve come to expect.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      I suppose therein lies the difference. You were trained to think. He was trained to make money.

    2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      What are you paid to do?

  5. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    J Paul Getty felt that for careers not specifically requiring advanced study, like medicine and engineering, people would be better off going from high school directly into their endeavor of choice. He believed college graduates would never catch up to that four year head start and learning specific job skills.

    1. VaNavVet Avatar
      VaNavVet

      There was really no need to question the work ethic of recently graduated college students.

      1. Lefty665 Avatar
        Lefty665

        Who said anything about work ethic? Getty’s observation was that the 4 year head start learning a business by going directly into it left college folks behind.

        1. VaNavVet Avatar
          VaNavVet

          The article did so and my response to it seemed to fit better with your post.

          1. Lefty665 Avatar
            Lefty665

            Criticizing me for something I did not say “fit better with my post”?

            That is a standard you would not appreciate if applied to you.

          2. VaNavVet Avatar
            VaNavVet

            Not intended to be directed at you.

  6. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    We might as well face the future with some proportional predictions.

    With people living longer healthier lives, retirement age will have to be raised to 70 or more.
    Similarly, K-12 will have to become K-14 to meet future education needs of the “none college” workforce.
    As a result, the age of majority will need to be increased from 18 to 21. It was fine to kick junior out of the house at 18 when an 18-year old had all the necessary skills to till 40 acres and father two kids.

    BTW, college was never about getting job training. It’s about knowledge. You want job skills then find an apprenticeship.

  7. Thank you for writing this column, Robin. The issue of credentialism hasn’t gotten nearly as much attention as it deserves. If we want to conduct an honest analysis of “systemic racism” in American society, credentialism would figure prominently. Why should employees be required to acquire expensive college degree credentials that impart the same skills that can be learned on the job?

    Whom does this phenomenon hurt the most? Clearly, it hurts the poor and minorities disproportionately who find it much harder to access higher education. But Ruling Class media rarely talks about this. Why? Because the higher-ed industry is the primary beneficiary, and higher-ed is a critical player in the Ruling Class coalition. Thus, we end up chasing phantoms like white supremacy, white privilege, etc. etc.

    1. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
      Dick Hall-Sizemore

      Your comments are applicable to the private sector as well. Companies used to have their own training programs. Now they rely on the public sector for that training, for which students often have to pay. For example, some community colleges have programs that teach students to climb utility poles and perform general line work. https://www.farmvilleherald.com/2020/07/power-line-students-climb-to-success/ms to teach students how to climb utility poles and perform power line work.

    2. VaNavVet Avatar
      VaNavVet

      Clearly, those are not “phantoms” as the Unite the Right Rally in Charlottesville demonstrated. The chants were loud and clear that “Jews will not replace us”. So were they talking about the Ruling class coalition?

Leave a Reply