Karin Fischer has been writing about higher ed’s role as an engine of mobility for many years now (I’m not sure how much she appreciated being reminded that it’s been 14 years, for example, since she and I worked together on a Growing Divide series for The Chronicle of Higher Education).
She has
a new story out this week about the topic. If college is a ladder to the middle class, it remains a pretty rickety one, she concludes. Instead of acting as a leveler, higher ed often magnifies economic differences and reinforces them.
Her story kicks off
a yearlong project at
The Chronicle of Higher Education to examine the role that higher ed plays in social mobility. It’s funded by a grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
What’s Changed
I asked Karin what’s changed since she’s been reporting on this topic. Here’s what she told me:
Having more data is depressing but also galvanizing. There’s so much more data now, and it all reinforces a disturbing and negative picture of just how many barriers there are and how much is broken. So, in some ways, Karin says, that makes the problem seem even more intractable.
At the same time, she sees how all this new data has moved more people to act. There are a wider range of individuals and organizations, researchers and policy analysts, worried about inequity now than before, she says. Data from
Raj Chetty at
Opportunity Insights, in particular, Karin says, has been incredibly important in focusing broader attention on education’s role in mobility. It’s also brought more complexity to the discussion, giving us more information about things like how geography matters and just how much individual colleges help or not.
The conversation has gotten richer. How people are analyzing and defining mobility is changing, Karin says. Before, this all seemed like a discussion framed around the question: What’s the value of college? A lot of the information we had was about people’s jobs and earnings after graduation.
Now, with more data and research, it’s become a richer conversation, focused more on asking: How are people going to have a better life, and how does college play a role in that? Researchers and policymakers are thinking about the stakes of inequity more holistically, how it matters for getting a better job, yes, but also for how it affects health and how long you live.
The Pell Grant is broken. One statistic that stood out in Karin’s story was this: When the Pell Grant was enacted, in 1965, it covered nearly 80 percent of the cost of attending a four-year public college. Now it covers barely 30 percent. What it used to mean to people, Karin says, is just not what it means now.
Focusing on fixing this one thing might make a significant difference, she says. But what that would take highlights another issue. The problems of inequity are so complex, many actors and systems have to be involved for big change to happen. Making the Pell Grant more powerful again would require a series of coordinated decisions from leaders at the federal, state, and institutional level that would put more federal dollars toward the grant, put more state money toward colleges, and hold down tuition.
Now What?
This isn’t to say things are hopeless. Karin also wrote about
three colleges that are helping students climb the economic ladder. And, she says, just as there are many factors that have entrenched inequality, there are also many ideas that people can try, and are trying, to intervene. “The answer,” she writes, “is yes, and — and more and more and more.”
P.S. When Karin’s not writing about social mobility, she’s tackling the changing relationships between American colleges and the world. Get
latitude(s), her weekly Open Campus newsletter,
here.
