While I think that there is some validity to your point, I would like more data rather simply your opinion on the matter. I will now play devil’s advocate.
Apart from that, you say that part of the problem with “contemporary” universities, but what has changed in recent history with teaching that has suddenly brought universities on the downhill slope? Surely British and European universities that have been around far longer have the same such problems. The general idea of teacher/student relationship does not seem to have undergone significant changes since first instituted centuries ago, except perhaps now with the advent of online degrees/programs.
Beyond that, although surely there is some laziness on both the part of professors and students, Institutions do have a stake in making sure that students have the requisite knowledge that is expected of them. Universities many times work with employers to develop and implement curriculum. I work at a college currently that is implementing a healthcare degree that by and large is being done because of demand from area employers. These employers have had more than a small part in designing curriculum.
My personal area of expertise is accounting. If anyone wants to really be an accountant, a degree is not enough. Professional certifications are a requisite to do almost any accounting position. There are a multitude of accounting and business related organizations that offer certifications for various areas such as CPA, CMA, CFE, CIA and many more. Obviously these organizations are independent, and have a stake in upholding their standards. However, just like colleges, they also need to contend with the duality of maintaining standards but also the fact that the revenue for the organization comes in large part from dues, which increase the more people pass the exam.
In any organization like colleges there is going to be this inherent conflict. Even in an organization like OECD, why would a college pay to administer the exams, and probably also to qualify into the organization if it knew it was on the lower end? Thus it would benefit the OECD to not have a comparison system, but rather a criteria system that could give everyone high marks. I am not saying this is the case, I am saying that there is a pressure to do so. Ultimately, it is government that needs to require colleges into programs like this for the welfare of society, since the results will obviously be very bad for some of the participants. In the same way if your school loses accreditation, you will almost cease to exist as a higher education institution since it would disqualify the institution from receiving federal student loans and grant money.
Good questions. I don’t know whether there was grade inflation prior to the 20th century; perhaps there was.
Of course there are bodies that oversee the universities to different degrees. However, my guess is that such systems can never extert the same pressure at the universities as completely independent grading can. Consider the driving school parallell again and compare a system where driving schools would be able to issue licenses, but where they were checked now and then by government bodies with the present system where the licenses are issued by the government. It seems to me obvious that if those checks weren’t extremely stringent—something that most checks of universities certainly aren’t (many of them are also a bit arbitrary, something there’s been a big discussion on in Sweden, where I come from) - the former system would lead to a lowering of standards. It would also extert less pressure on low standard driving schools, who in the present system are either forced to improve or are out-competed.
In some areas you do have independent tests already, which is brilliant. That’s exactly what I’m advocating. However, usually you don’t. Employers can influence university degrees in some areas, as you say, but in most areas this influence is very limited (and resented by professors and left-wing parties and student organizations).
I don’t have more data at the moment. What kind of data is it that you want? I don’t think I just stated my opinion, though—I offered reasons for my views. Besides, they are widely shared—the point about perverse incentives seems really obvious actually.
While I think that there is some validity to your point, I would like more data rather simply your opinion on the matter. I will now play devil’s advocate.
As it stands, there are some outside players that regulate universities, mainly the regional associations that give colleges their accreditation. Standards for accreditation can be found here: http://www.ncahlc.org/Criteria-Eligibility-and-Candidacy/criteria-and-core-components.html
Apart from that, you say that part of the problem with “contemporary” universities, but what has changed in recent history with teaching that has suddenly brought universities on the downhill slope? Surely British and European universities that have been around far longer have the same such problems. The general idea of teacher/student relationship does not seem to have undergone significant changes since first instituted centuries ago, except perhaps now with the advent of online degrees/programs.
Beyond that, although surely there is some laziness on both the part of professors and students, Institutions do have a stake in making sure that students have the requisite knowledge that is expected of them. Universities many times work with employers to develop and implement curriculum. I work at a college currently that is implementing a healthcare degree that by and large is being done because of demand from area employers. These employers have had more than a small part in designing curriculum.
My personal area of expertise is accounting. If anyone wants to really be an accountant, a degree is not enough. Professional certifications are a requisite to do almost any accounting position. There are a multitude of accounting and business related organizations that offer certifications for various areas such as CPA, CMA, CFE, CIA and many more. Obviously these organizations are independent, and have a stake in upholding their standards. However, just like colleges, they also need to contend with the duality of maintaining standards but also the fact that the revenue for the organization comes in large part from dues, which increase the more people pass the exam.
In any organization like colleges there is going to be this inherent conflict. Even in an organization like OECD, why would a college pay to administer the exams, and probably also to qualify into the organization if it knew it was on the lower end? Thus it would benefit the OECD to not have a comparison system, but rather a criteria system that could give everyone high marks. I am not saying this is the case, I am saying that there is a pressure to do so. Ultimately, it is government that needs to require colleges into programs like this for the welfare of society, since the results will obviously be very bad for some of the participants. In the same way if your school loses accreditation, you will almost cease to exist as a higher education institution since it would disqualify the institution from receiving federal student loans and grant money.
Good questions. I don’t know whether there was grade inflation prior to the 20th century; perhaps there was.
Of course there are bodies that oversee the universities to different degrees. However, my guess is that such systems can never extert the same pressure at the universities as completely independent grading can. Consider the driving school parallell again and compare a system where driving schools would be able to issue licenses, but where they were checked now and then by government bodies with the present system where the licenses are issued by the government. It seems to me obvious that if those checks weren’t extremely stringent—something that most checks of universities certainly aren’t (many of them are also a bit arbitrary, something there’s been a big discussion on in Sweden, where I come from) - the former system would lead to a lowering of standards. It would also extert less pressure on low standard driving schools, who in the present system are either forced to improve or are out-competed.
In some areas you do have independent tests already, which is brilliant. That’s exactly what I’m advocating. However, usually you don’t. Employers can influence university degrees in some areas, as you say, but in most areas this influence is very limited (and resented by professors and left-wing parties and student organizations).
I don’t have more data at the moment. What kind of data is it that you want? I don’t think I just stated my opinion, though—I offered reasons for my views. Besides, they are widely shared—the point about perverse incentives seems really obvious actually.