We Can't Measure Achievement So Why Spend Money On Higher Education?

David Brooks decides to change the debate about higher education. Pundits like Tom Friedman tell us that the future of America is dependent upon winning the education race. The world is flat, and only the best educated nations will be able to compete in the knowledge economy. Others are concerned that price inflation, slow wage growth, and lower government support for higher education, stand in the way of Friedman's challenge. In this article, David Brooks tells us that students may not be learning anything important in college. He supports that claim by selecting research that supports his position. He challenges colleges to provide more information to "consumers" so that they can make better decisions about whether to make the investment in higher education. Perhaps government funding for higher education ought to be dependent upon the ability of a college to demonstrate that learning has taken place. Apparently, passing examinations on the courses that they have taken is not enough for him. That only raises the question about alternative measures of student achievement. We could have that discussion for the next thousand years. In the meantime we should not be worried about improving access to higher education. "Consumers" should not spend money on something that is difficult to measure, and neither should government.