Response to Community College

Last week, in lower Jenny Hunt’s “Community College” opinions article—which was remarkably similar to David Brooks’ “Support our Students,” published in The New York Times a few months prior—she supported rejection of Obama’s free community college proposal and pushed for greater support systems for students already enrolled.

Hunt added a few vague figures to Brooks’ arguments—including muddily rephrasing Brooks’ “$60 billion over 10 years” to “$6 billion-a-year price tag”—and drew false conclusions from the non-contextualized numbers. “The U.S. Department of Education estimates that only 18 percent of students complete their two-year degree within three years, and even the schools with the best reported rates are reaching only 30 percent to 40 percent completion,” Hunt wrote. “These statistics expose a problem that can only be solved with work from the inside of the community college system.”

What Brooks and Hunt failed to realize was that many of the students who drop out do so because they are unable to continue paying tuition or living expenses; these students are adults of all ages who may well be struggling through financial or personal crises yet still posses the drive to receive an education. Why not decrease the dropout rate by paying for these students?

“With Their Whole Lives Ahead of Them,” a study issued by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, provides us with more context for Hunt’s numbers. The foundation’s main goal, according to the Public Agenda website, is to “dispel some common myths about why so many students do not graduate and details what kinds of changes—by government, higher education, business and others—might make a difference.”

To quote the study: “Among those attending community colleges, 6 in 10 work more than 20 hours a week, and more than a quarter work more than 35 hours a week.” A survey cited work as the number one reason why students dropped out of school; students could not repay loans and debts while working part-time or full-time jobs.

Another less significant contribution to the high non-completion rate is the enrollment of students who do not plan to complete a full education at the college level. They have no need to attend classes outside of their field of work and may simply take a handful courses to improve expertise in one area before “dropping out.”

Hunt was also unaware of the flexibility and utility of Pell Grants. She claimed that reducing students’ costs for school would prove ineffective as “community college is already free or relatively inexpensive with the help of Pell Grants and state aid.” But Pell Grants are not always renewed, and even if they are, students must pay for a living outside of school: transportation, housing, food. If Obama’s proposal were to pass, students would be able to attend community college for free and use their Pell Grants to cover those external costs.

That isn’t to say at all, however, that Hunt’s points are invalidated; we must consider them in order to improve college education. Part of the dropout rate, though not as high as Hunt made it seem, is in fact attributed to lack of guidance counseling systems. Some students become stressed out because of the internal workload at the school, not from external money-making jobs. But her end of the extreme is not what the country needs—the growing cost of living, outside of tuition, would force many prospective students away from education and only benefit those already able to afford it.

As a first step, Obama’s plan would achieve more than Hunts’. Enrollment would shoot up, and more students would have the opportunity to take courses relating to their field of work. The number of student loans would decrease, and students would graduate with little to no debt. Obama’s plan most certainly could stand alone and do a proficient job. But to achieve even more, Republicans must first agree to support plans similar to Brooks’—a notion many constituents of the party reject.

Without qualifications in statistical analysis and experience in the field of education, it’s hard to say to what extent the proposals will help. Preferably, the country should initiate a plan that hovers in between the two extremes, between a full tuition waiver and a funded support system. But with a Democratic president in place and a Republican Congress in power, any compromise seems unlikely.