Issues in higher education in the United States

U.S. college students come from three major sources: the U.S. K-12 pipeline, adult or non-traditional students, and international students.[2][3] Projections about future enrollment patterns are based on demographic projections about these groups.[4][5]

Those who attend U.S. colleges and universities choose particular institutions based on several factors, including price, prestige and selectivity of the school, course offerings and college majors, location, campus culture, and job opportunities following graduation.[19][20]

High school students aspiring to be selected to the best colleges start the college-choice process earlier and make decisions earlier. Financial aid is an important factor in students' college choice process. Rising college prices and the increased need to rely on loans constrain the college choice process for low-income students.[21]

Latinos are more likely than white or African-American students to begin postsecondary study at community colleges than at four-year institutions.[22][23] As a result of these decisions, Latinos are "converting existing colleges and institutions into HSIs (Historically Serving Institutions)."[23]

African-Americans have chosen historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs) because of geography, religion, the college's academic reputation, and relatives' desires. The top three reasons for choosing predominantly white institutions has been athletic recruitment, proximity, and the college's academic reputation.[24]

In 2019, the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis published research (using data from the 2016 Survey of Consumer Finances) demonstrating that large and increasing income and wealth premiums for families with heads of household with post-secondary education as compared to those without in aggregate data are misleading. After controlling for race and age cohort, the income premium for families with heads of household with post-secondary education has remained positive but has declined to historic lows for families with heads of household born since 1980 (with more pronounced downward trajectories with heads of household with post-graduate degrees), while wealth premiums for the 1980s cohort has weakened to the point of statistical insignificance (in part because of the rising cost of college).[38] Research from the center-left think tank Third Way claims that, in 2018, more than half of institutions left the majority of their students earning less than $28,000—the typical salary of a high school graduate.[39]

In 2021, student loan debt in the United States amounted to $1.71 trillion owed by 45 million borrowers with an average student loan debt of $37,693,[40] while the median value of an owner-occupied housing unit in the United States in the 2015–2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimates was $217,500 (with the ratio of average student loan debt to a median owner-housing unit value amounting to approximately 17 percent).[41] In June 2022, the U.S. Department of Education agreed to forgive the student loans of approximately 200,000 borrowers (amounting to approximately $6 billion) to settle a class-action lawsuit the students filed against the Department in June 2019 for refusing to process their waivers from debt owed to for-profit institutions that misled the students about the financial remuneration, the quality of vocational training, and the career advancement they would receive by attending the institutions.[42][43] In August 2022, the Department of Education announced that it would cancel the student loans of 208,000 borrowers who attended ITT Technical Institute (amounting to $3.9 billion).[44][45] In October 2022, the Department released final regulations to expand and streamline targeted debt relief programs for students that were defrauded by the institutions they attended,[46][47] as well as changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program which led to 360,000 borrowers qualifying for $24 billion in debt relief.[48]

In December 2022, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report requested by U.S. House Education and Labor Committee Ranking Member Virginia Foxx that surveyed and assessed the financial aid offer letters of a nationally representative sample of 176 colleges on ten best practices recommended by the Financial Literacy and Education Commission in 2019 and found that 91 percent of the colleges surveyed did not include an estimate of the net price of attending the institution or understated the estimated net price, that approximately two-thirds of the colleges surveyed followed five or fewer of the ten best practices, that no college followed all ten, and that at least one college followed none.[49][50][51] Additionally, the GAO found that only 3 percent of the colleges surveyed used a standardized Department of Education form that conforms to the best practices for financial aid offers to students (while only one-third used it as a supplementary form to their own financial aid offer letters), and in interviews with college financial aid officers, the GAO found that some colleges intentionally withhold information to prevent sticker shock and to not put themselves at a competitive disadvantage with colleges that do not include such disclosures.[49][52] The GAO recommended that Congress consider legislation requiring college financial aid offer letters include clear and standard information following the best practices as federal law does not currently require standardized disclosures from colleges.[49][53]

Higher education plays a vital part of the American Dream for most students. Going to college and earning a degree should be an investment that leads to a career or position that will allow a college graduate to be compensated with a higher wage compared to the wage of someone without a degree, however, you can acquire student loan debts whether you graduate or not if you don't have a full ride to attend at little or no cost. According to the Center for American Progress (CAP), there are many factors that contribute to the rise in the student loan crisis, but borrower find that repaying their loans whether federal or private can be challenging.[54]

Other research shows that selection of a four-year college as compared to a two-year junior college, even by marginal students such as those with a C+ grade average in high school and SAT scores in the mid-800s, increases the probability of graduation and confers substantial economic and social benefits for most undergraduates.[55][56][57] However, the admission of so many marginal students does impact graduation rates, partly due to the need for these students to take noncredit remedial courses in English, reading, math or science.[58][59] Some fields of study produce many more graduates than the professions can take in. Due to the resulting higher education bubble, these graduates often have to consider jobs for which they are overqualified, or that have no academic requirements.[60] Employers have responded to the oversupply of graduates by raising the academic requirements of many occupations higher than is really necessary to perform the work.[61][62]

College Degree Returns by Average 2011 Annual Out-of-Pocket Costs, from B. Caplan's The Case Against Education

First-year U.S. college degree returns for select majors, by type of student.

In The Theory of the Leisure Class (1899), economist Thorstein Veblen observed that "Conspicuous consumption of valuable goods is a means of reputability to the gentleman of leisure",[63] and that conspicuous leisure is the "non-productive consumption of time. Time is consumed non-productively (1) from a sense of the unworthiness of productive work, and (2) as an evidence of pecuniary ability to afford a life of idleness."[64]

In The Case Against Education (2018), economist Bryan Caplan notes that the bulk of what students learn is quickly forgotten after final examinations. It merely serves the purpose of signalling to employers that a graduate is probably brilliant, diligent, and willing to tolerate serious boredom. To remedy this situation, he proposes a massive shift in emphasis from academic degrees to vocational training. Public spending on university education should be eliminated so that underemployment-prone degrees will become less attractive to students of average ability. The vast public funds thus saved could then be redirected to other purposes.[65]

Failure to acquire degree-relevant employment soon after graduation often has a long-term impact on one's career, particularly for women and those with non-STEM degrees. In 2019, the Census Bureau reported that majoring in STEM does not always guarantee a position in that occupation, however they earned a much higher salary than college educated workers who did not.[66] Students can reduce the risk of underemployment by thorough evaluation of the employment prospects of each major, by taking full advantage of work experience programs, by choosing a high-demand specialization within a profession, and by acquiring broadly desirable skills. In addition to those that are specific to a particular profession, employers in any profession are looking for evidence of critical thinking and analytical reasoning skills, teamworking skills, information literacy, ethical judgment, decision-making skills, fluency in speaking and writing English, problem solving skills, and a wide knowledge of liberal arts and sciences.[67]

People with higher education have always tended to have higher salaries and less unemployment than people with less education. However, the type of degree has a large impact on future earnings.[68][69] Average annual earnings range from $27,000 for high school dropouts to $80,000 for those with a graduate degree. Undergraduate earnings range from $46,000 in education to $85,000 in architecture and engineering. Graduate earnings for those same majors are $61,000 and $107,000 respectively. It must be kept in mind, however, that these figures are only averages. There is a significant amount of overlap in the earning power of different levels of education, and the different fields of study.[70]

Although vocational education is usually less financially lucrative in the long term than a bachelor's degree, it can still provide a respectable income at much less cost in time and money, sometimes with the option of upgrading to a bachelor's degree at a later date. Even ten years after graduation, there are many people with a certificate or associate degree who earn more money than those with a B.A.[71][72] [73] [74] It can also benefit university graduates, since some four-year schools fail to prepare their graduates for the kinds of jobs that are available in their surrounding regions. One in twelve community college students already possess a bachelor's degree.[75]

Gainful employment is a concept that ties college attainment with improved job opportunities. In 2010, the Obama Administration began enacting gainful employment policies that required career colleges to maintain transparency and accountability about their effectiveness, and tied federal Title IV funding with gainful employment performance.[76] Under Department of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, these policies have been unraveled, partly because they did not apply to non-profit and public colleges.[77][78] They have been replaced by the Department of Education's College Scorecard, which enables students to see the socio-economic diversity, SAT/ACT scores, graduation rates, and average earnings and debt of graduates at all colleges.[79]

PayScale's analysis of schools and return on investment shows that a number of schools have a negative ROI.[80][81][82] PayScale also offers analysis of College ROI by career path.[83]

In 2018, the Urban Institute published a report on college ROI, noting that "Although higher education pays off for many, the exact returns for an individual are highly uncertain and evolve over time." The report added that factors include "the cost of higher education after grants; the length of time in school and the likelihood of certificate or degree completion; the earnings returns from a given level of degree, major, or institution; the student's demographic background; and local economic conditions."[84]

Socioeconomic status can play a significant role in an individual's enrollment, performance, and completion of their college degree and pursuit of higher education.

Children with parents in the top 1% of the income distribution are 77 times more likely to attend an elite college or university than children with parents in the bottom 20% of the income distribution.[86]

From the 1950s to the 2010s, the United States higher education system was increasingly viewed as a vehicle for social mobility and economic equality. As a result, there was a clear struggle to try and open access to higher education for the wider population so that more individuals could benefit from this economic good. Programs like affirmative action were at the forefront of this struggle, to help under-represented racial groups gain greater access to higher education. By increasing access to diverse and minority populations, greater social mobility was expected. However, a 2016 report by the Georgetown's Center on Education and the Workforce demonstrated that progress had not yet been adequately made. The report made clear that higher education has been a source of increasing racial inequality in the United States. The authors, Anthony Carnevale and Jeff Strohl, focused on Latinos and African American minority groups. Through their research they show that overall access for minority enrollment has increased at a greater rate than enrollment for white students, but this growth is heavily concentrated in the poorest, and least selective colleges and universities.[102]

National Center for Education Statistics data showed that black college graduates owed on average $25,000 more than white college graduates and 48 percent of black college graduates owed 12.5% more than they borrowed 4 years after graduation.[103] In 2016, the Brookings Institution released a report finding that black graduates owed an average of $52,726 in total while white graduates owed an average of $28,006 and that the black-white disparity was due to differences in interest accrual and graduate school borrowing,[104] while the Urban Institute released a report using data from the 2014 Federal Reserve Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (SHED) showing that borrowers aged 25 to 55 who took on student loan debt to finance an undergraduate degree, black borrowers owed $32,047 on average while white borrowers owed $18,685 and Hispanic borrowers owed $15,853.[105]

Growing inequality between universities has an effect on graduation rates and time to complete a degree for students. The study shows that more selective universities provide their students with better resources.[102] The authors show that the 82 most selective colleges spend $27,900/student on average, while the least selective open access two- and four-year colleges (where Latinos and African Americans are over-represented) spend $6,000/student on average.[102] Open-access colleges, are colleges that admit at least 80% of their students and typically include community colleges, for-profit schools, and some public universities. Unsurprisingly, graduation rates are the highest in the more selective universities, where more resources are available to students inside and outside of the universities. They further demonstrate that persistence and completion rates at more selective universities are higher regardless of race or ethnicity. The end product of this is the increased reproduction of educational inequalities across generations.[102] Furthermore, consider that roughly 34% of African American and Hispanic students who earn bachelor's degrees at the top 468 colleges attain graduate degrees, compared with 23% who attend open-access colleges.[102] The effect that top colleges have on minority students not only leads to better graduation rates for undergraduate students, but also makes the completion of a graduate education more likely.

This data presents a serious challenge to proponents of "mismatch" theory, which was advocated during the Supreme Court Case, Fisher v. University of Texas in 2013. It claims that affirmative action causes more harm than benefit, because it provides access opportunities to students that are not prepared well enough to succeed at more elite institutions.[106] Proponents of "mismatch" theory argue that affirmative action should therefore be repealed, because it is not achieving its intended effect. This data shows that the opposite is true, in that many minority students are attending less selective universities, and are therefore not being given enough resources to succeed. These resources include, "substantial labor market advantages, including more than $2 million per student in higher lifetime earnings, and access to professional and managerial elite jobs, as well as careers that bring personal and social empowerment."[102] The issue is not that they are attending more selective universities and failing, its that they are attending the least selective universities that are overcrowded and underfunded.

Degrees conferred in United States since 1970 by year, degree type, and gender (2011). Dashed lines are projected. Since 1982 more bachelor's degrees have been conferred on women. First label letters: F=female, M=male. Second label letters: A=Associate's, B=Bachelor's, M=Master's, D=Doctorate and professional degree.[114]

In discussing students' access to education in the U.S., one area of research has focused on the differences that exist between their entry and completion rates based on gender. For children born after 1960, more white women have been graduating from college than white men, which represents a change from children born before this time.[115]

Bailey & Dynarski (2011) found that the increase in inequality in education between low and high income groups observed over the previous 30 years had been predominantly driven by rising educational attainment among women from high-income backgrounds.[115] In 2010–11, 33 percent more bachelor's degrees were conferred to women than men, with the gender gap projected to increase to 37 percent by 2021–22.[114]

Within higher-income families, women make up a greater percentage (15 percent compared to 7 percent) of this growth. While the largest gap of educational attainment between men and women is seen in the highest income group, women are attaining higher levels of education than men in every income group. This observation poses a unique and confusing problem: if educational attainment has a positive correlation to familial income, why are more women entering and completing college than men? Bailey and Dynarski proposed that the observed educational gap by gender may be due to differing incentives to accumulate human capital. Men and women may participate in what they term "segregated labor markets" and "asymmetric marriage markets," and perhaps, to make up for those perceived market differences, woman are more motivated to obtain higher levels of education.[115]

The gap of educational attainment between men and women is starting at a young age and affecting students access to higher education later in life. According to Bailey & Dynarski, there are two main explanations for the gender differences in educational attainment and inequality. First, men and women respond in different and gender-specific ways to family and/or school circumstances, and second, the differences in circumstances by men and women of the same family income and race have shaped inequality in educational attainment for some time. More specifically, the bulk of primary and secondary teachers are female and women run most single-parent households. The absence of a strong male role model affects males differently from females. Studies by Bailey & Dynarski have shown that teachers provide role models to demographically similar students, and their unintended biases affect their interactions and assessments of their students.[115]

Women in America hold nearly two thirds of all student loan debt.[116]

An April 2017 statement from the official blog of the American Council on Education (ACE) reported,

"Most LGBTQ students report that the climate— their feelings of belonging, safety and inclusion— in college is better than the one they experienced in high school. And evidence exists that overall, campus climate has improved over the last 15 years. Yet this progress is not consistent across institutions. Reports of harassment and discrimination, especially for transgender students, remain a problem at a time when student learning and persistence are central issues for higher education leaders. Of particular concern are student reports of harassment in classrooms and other learning contexts, of widespread cyber bullying, and of the amplification of racism and sexism through homophobic and transphobic harassment. Research on campus climate generally and LGBTQ climate specifically points to the negative consequences of hostile climates for student learning, persistence in college and mental health and wellness."[117]

The 2019 Youth Risk Behavior Survey found that high school students in America who identified as lesbian, gay, or bisexual stated that they had contemplated suicide at a rate three times higher than straight-identified students. Organizations such as the children's rights group Child Trends have attributed these trends and other effects of malformed child development that have lasting influence throughout both teenage and later years to pervasive discrimination in the U.S., with American educational institutions having to deal with multiple dozen state legislatures proposing prejudicial legal measures in the 2020s.[118]

It is estimated that 65,000 undocumented immigrants finish high school each year. These students have lived in the United States for more than 5 years and most were often brought to the United States by their parents as young children.[119] This leaves the U.S. Government with the question of what rights to give the undocumented immigrants after they finish high school, particularly with access to higher education. A 2010 study conducted at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV) on undocumented immigrants and higher education:

Installing pathways to higher education and in-state tuition for undocumented students in the United States presents both opportunities and constraints in developing practices that promote social justice, equity, and equality. Those who are sympathetic to the challenges facing undocumented students may support opportunities to promote the potential of those who are deserving of incorporation and membership in U.S. society. On the other hand, proponents of tighter borders and tougher immigration laws may view all undocumented people, including model, hardworking young people, as "illegals" or temporary workers and consider them to be drains on the resources of society. This puts educational administrators in precarious positions since they are professionals who are trained to promote and support students in their pursuit of knowledge and self-improvement. Therefore, many professionals are left with little choice but to search for individuals and resources already established within outlaw cultures."[120]

In 1996, the United States passed a law banning states from offering residency benefits to undocumented immigrants that they didn't then also offer to every U.S. citizen. This basically made it so that states could not offer in-state tuition to undocumented immigrants, even if they technically qualified based on residency status. States have argued the clarity of this law and many have enacted their own laws allowing in-state tuition to be given on the claims that it is based on high school attendance and not explicitly residency.[119] This law is especially important since undocumented immigrants are also unable to obtain governmental financial aid and are unable to legally work, leaving them without sources to help pay for out-of-state tuition.[120]

The DREAM Act was introduced in 2001 and aims to give more access to higher education for undocumented immigrants by repealing the law 1996 law. It also aimed to set up pathways for students who obtain higher education to become legal residents. The act has been introduced in many states and many different times, but has still not been passed. Critics of the act argue that it encourages more undocumented immigration, that schools will engage in grade inflation so that border-line students can take advantage of the act, and that a financial burden could be placed on taxpayers. Proponents argue the opposite, emphasizing that giving the undocumented immigrants an opportunity at higher education means they will be more self-sufficient in the future, contributing more to taxes and relying less on state resources. They also claim that children should not be punished for the actions of their parents and that giving them this opportunity would encourage them to be contributing and law-abiding citizens. Whether this act would have positive effects on undocumented immigrants attending college is still hard to see since not many states have actually done it and the time span has not been enough for thorough research.[119]

A slightly lower percentage of college-age Americans from rural areas go to college: in 2015, 67 percent from suburban high schools, 62 percent from urban high schools, and 59 percent from rural high schools. The difference is even larger for higher-income schools (73% suburban, 72% urban, 61% rural).[121]

Demonstrated ability in reading, mathematics, and writing, as typically measured in the United States by the SAT or similar tests such as the ACT, have often replaced colleges' individual entrance exams, and is often required for admission to higher education.[122] There is some question as to whether advanced mathematical skills or talent are in fact necessary for fields such as history, English, philosophy, or art.[123]

Six years after entering a four-year program, 58 percent of students at public colleges will have graduated, 65 percent of students at private non-profit colleges will have graduated, while 27 percent of students at for-profit colleges will have graduated. Six-year graduation rates of four-year programs depend to a great extent on a college's entrance requirements, ranging from 89 percent at those which accept less than one-quarter of applicants to 36 percent at those with an open admissions policy.[124]

Grade inflation has been prevalent at American colleges since the 1960s. Between 1965 and 1975, GPAs sharply increased so that the most common letter grade went from "C" to a "B." Since the mid-1990s it has been an "A." [125] On average, private colleges have been more subject to this phenomenon than public colleges, as have the liberal arts compared to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) courses, post-graduate courses compared to undergraduate courses, and courses taught by women compared to courses taught by men. Unlike GPAs, overall test scores have remained relatively steady over time, and graduate literacy has remained constant.[126]

Financial pressures have made college administrations increasingly reluctant to lose the tuition obligations of students who might otherwise be failed or expelled, and to fill their classrooms they must accept students who may not be able to complete a four-year degree in four years.[127][128]

Research has been done since the 1970s into the political views of faculty members and whether this influences the student experience. Lecturers are more liberal supporting the Democratic party than the general population.[129][130] 58 percent of Americans thought that college professors' political bias was a "serious problem", with this concerning 91 percent of "very conservative" adults, but only 3 percent of liberals.[131] Research showed this did not affect their performance.[132]

Free speech on the campus is assumed. Some universities have been hit by lawsuits from right-wing groups who claim that they have facilitated disruptive actions by left-wing groups.[133] Some professors have claimed that their universities teach controversial views, but prohibit any criticism of those views in class.[134]

The Anti-Defamation League verified more than 300 incidents of white nationalist hate propaganda at more than 200 college and university campuses in 2018.[135]

The Jackson Memorial Hospital (MJMH) complex in Miami, Florida, which serves as the primary teaching hospital for the Leonard M. Miller School of Medicine ((UMMSM) within the University of Miami (UM), is pictured in July 2010.

Concerns of a current and future shortage of medical doctors due to the supply and demand for physicians in the United States have come from multiple entities including professional bodies such as the American Medical Association (AMA).[184] The subject has been analyzed as well by the American news media in publications such as Forbes,[185] The Nation,[186] and Newsweek.[187] In the 2010s, a study released by the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) titled The Complexities of Physician Supply and Demand: Projections From 2019 to 2034 specifically projected a shortage of between 37,800 and 124,000 individuals within the following two decades, approximately.[184]

The AMA has cited increasing costs of higher education in America as a barrier to adequate growth in physician supply. In a 2022 article, the organization stated that "[m]edical school graduates typically finish school with about $200,000 in medical student-loan debt, which is often seen as an influential factor in specialty choice." The discussion of anticipated financial burdens from schooling itself can also result in a self-fulfilling prophecy.[184] In December 2021, an article from the financial publication Forbes argued that the "lack of funding for residency slots to expand the pool of physicians in the U.S. has been an issue for more than two decades."[185] Healthcare in America itself may deteriorate for certain communities due to such trends, particularly in terms of the lack of access to specialty services in rural areas.[184]

As the proportion of the student population going into higher education has grown to include those of average ability, universities either have to accept a low graduation rate,[188] or accommodate them with a decline in academic standards, facilitated by grade inflation.[189][190][127] Also, the supply of graduates in many fields of study is exceeding the demand for their skills, which aggravates graduate unemployment, underemployment, credentialism and educational inflation.[191][192]

Some advocates say that the financial costs that universities require from their students has gone up so dramatically that it is leaving many students in debt of loans of an average of $37,172 compared to 2000, where the average debt students graduated with was $16,928.[193] In the United States there is an estimated 44 million Americans with a combined $1.3 trillion student loan debt.[194] Advocates advise parents to not send their children to college unless these children are committed to pursuing their future education. An increasing number of freshman every year drop out of their perspective programs or do not possess the maturity to have a balanced life away from home.[195]

More and more critics also appear regarding the weaknesses of liberal education in the form of a brick-and-mortar campus. Charles Murray, for example, pointed out that with the development of the internet, the scholarship that flourishes through colleagueships no longer exists, because the scholars could now be informed with the most up-to-date publications in a specific field, and use other scholars' ideas for reference now. According to these scholars, the four-year brick-and-mortar residential college fail to teach the students to make a living. Colleges should be a place for people to learn how to make a living instead of a place that simply offers 32 semester-long courses. The classrooms in these colleges are inefficient, and people could learn more quickly by themselves. In order to become skillful and professional in a certain area, 32 course are too many. Moreover, work experiences are more important than course work for some of the occupations including high-school teacher and journalist. Next, most academic sources such as technical journals and books are available and searchable online for a price or for free now. Therefore, libraries in the colleges only provide a pleasant surrounding for students to study nowadays. The system of colleagueships, which is the basic for colleges, is fading. With the development of science and technology, the scholars could now contact and communicate with each other using emails and the internet. Moreover, they could get updated with the latest academic news and information in every field. Therefore, the physical proximity is no longer an advantage of a brick-and-mortar college. Additionally, the technology of distance learning now enables students to communicate with the teachers online. Students could purchase online courses or videotape in order to learn something. As a result, colleges lost its advantage to some extent.[196]

However, the interaction between teachers and students are not easy in distant learning. Moreover, statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics indicate that the college educated are employed at a rate nearly twice that of the national average when compared to high school graduates.[197] The type of degree one pursues will determine how safe and prosperous his/her career path is. A study published by the Pew Charitable Trusts, shows that among Americans ages 21 to 24, the drop in employment and income was much steeper among people who lacked a college degree. "Among those whose highest degree was a high school diploma, only 55 percent had jobs even before the downturn, and that fell to 47 percent after it. For young people with an associate degree, the employment rate fell from 64 to 57. Bachelor's degree slipped from 69 to 65."[198]

Moreover, in recent years, with the rapid development of the science and technology, there has been an increasing demand for higher education. People receive systematic training through higher education, which means that they not only acquire knowledge, but also improve their research ability and learning skills in college. Higher education does not only benefit individuals, but also play an important role in the current skilled labor market, as education level has become one of the recruiting requirements. Andrew Delbanco, for example, has mentioned in his article that college degrees had already replaced high school diplomas and become the minimum requirement in the job market. Many employers believe that employees with higher educational levels tend to be more effective and efficient at work, because they have acquired specialized knowledge in a certain area as well as the ability to do research and solve problems independently. Since the college degree reflects a person's education level, it is not surprising that one with a higher education would earn more.[199]

Higher education has been taken various measures to provide students with more equal chances and resources. Many colleges have developed and constantly improved the financial aid system for the students with financial issues or even unforeseen financial difficulties in order to provide them with an equal opportunity to receive education. Some colleges choose to reduce or even waive the tuition fees for students who have an excellent academic performance. Some have set many awards and scholarships to help those who are in need or who perform well in all kinds of activities. Others offer on-campus job opportunities to students in the form of teaching assistant, research assistant, or tutor. This is an ideal strategy in my viewpoint because it not only solves the financial problem for students with poor background, but also allows students to practice university teaching in a professional manner. For example, Georgia State University supports students from poor families in all aspects to complete their studies. Originally, the university was regarded as a night school that was unremarkable. However, in order to help those who dropped out due to financial issues, the school has developed a series of linked programs in regard to the financial difficulties faced by those poor students who possessed less resources. It is obvious that the strategies are quite effective. For example, from 2011 on, the school has offered a one time reward of a few hundred dollars to student who cannot afford their tuitions. As Georgia State was working on retaining these low-income students, rather than just enrolling them, the graduation rate of the university has increased by 22 percent from 2003 to 2017.[200]

Also some colleges have introduced the concept of online library with e-books available to enrolled students for free. Moreover, colleges have provided all kinds of resources such as career planning courses and advisors to students who have problems with their future plan. Traditionally wealthy students would get more information in terms of careers and occupations. However, with the measures taken by higher education in order to provide more useful resources, now all the students have a more equal chance in the face of career choices. Additionally, many colleges have provided students with counseling and psychological resources so that they can better cope with stress and relieve the pressure they get in study and daily life. Research study has indicated that there is a close relationship between counseling experience and student retention. In other words, students who receive the psychological counseling services provided in higher education are more likely to stay enrolled in school.[201]

Additionally, in order to benefit a wider population and provide an opportunity to those who are restricted by time and financial conditions but are willing to learn by themselves, many elite universities, such as Yale, Stanford and MIT, have offered massive open online courses, generally known as MOOCs, to make the resources of higher education available to an increasing number of students. In the article "They Year of The MOOC" on New York Times, Aaura Pappano mentioned that back in the early 2000s, MOOCs had already been used as teaching aids. However, in 2012, MOOC experienced an explosive development, and a great number of elite universities participate in such events.[202]

Interest groups in U.S. higher education include philanthropic foundations, trade unions, trade associations, think tanks, and businesses associated with higher education.[203] Philanthropic organizations include the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, and the Charles Koch Foundation. Trade unions tied to higher education include the American Association of University Professors, American Federation of Teachers, and Service Employees International Union. Trade associations: include the American Council on Education, American Association of Community Colleges, American Association of State Colleges and Universities, and Association of American Universities.[204] Think tanks reporting on higher education include the Lumina Foundation, Center for American Progress, Brookings Institution, Third Way, and Cato Institute.[205] Businesses associated with higher education include student loan lenders, student loan debt collectors, academic publishers, and online program management companies. Notable companies include Wells Fargo, Discover Financial Services, Navient, Sallie Mae, Pearson, and Prentice Hall.[203][206]

• Discrimination in the United States
• History of education in the United States
• Medical education in the United States
• Poverty in the United States

• Hammond, Michael D. "Christian higher education in the United States: The crisis of evangelical identity." Christian Higher Education 18.1-2 (2019): 3-15. online

• Hannum, Kelly M., et al. "Women leaders within higher education in the United States: Supports, barriers, and experiences of being a senior leader." Advancing Women in Leadership Journal 35 (2015): 65-75. online

• Hodgman, Matthew R. "Understanding for-profit higher education in the United States through history, criticism, and public policy: A brief sector landscape synopsis." Journal of Educational Issues 4.2 (2018): 1-14. online

• Wodon, Quentin. "Catholic Higher Education in the United States: Exploring the Decision to Enroll from a Student’s (or a Student Advisor’s) Point of View." Religions 13.8 (2022): 732+ online.