Continuing education

Graduate school is the “Detroit” of education? And it’s producing graduates with worthless degrees? For shame, Mark Taylor!

On April 26, an article appeared in The New York Times slamming graduate education, citing too much specialization, the faults of tenure and increasing debt as reasons not to continue beyond a bachelor’s degree.

Taylor lumps all graduate schools into the stereotype of dry, archaic institutions that don’t contribute anything to society. Are graduate schools really obsolete? Well sure, if you don’t want to make any money.

Don’t get me wrong, a bachelor’s degree isn’t worthless, either. Education of any duration and intensity is always valuable. However, in this competitive economy, employers can now narrow their candidate pool to include those who have higher education degrees. A doctorate or master’s degree, or even post-bac certificates, can give job seekers the edge that employers are looking for.

Taylor does make some interesting points in his article about the restructuring of graduate programs. For instance, he proposes the abolishment of mandatory retirement and tenure.

It’s been known that for many professors a “guaranteed” job gives them little incentive to keep up with the needs of students. While the intentions of tenure—the safeguarding of academic freedom—are great, the results can be detrimental. Too often I’ve sat through tenured professors’ lackluster lectures, without any real passion or care for the subject.
 
I also warmed to the idea of getting rid of traditional dissertations. Many schools have already begun this process, and it’s a fantastic idea! This part of the program could be used to facilitate more hands-on experience, or to allow graduate students to get more creative with the knowledge they have gained.

However, Taylor also suggests disassembling the traditional, concrete specializations and programs, and adjusting them frequently to keep them current with the needs of society. This sounds great in theory; however, this particular suggestion would be very costly.

Changing programs means changing or providing training to instructors, scheduling issues, and helping students to adjust. Taylor, in essence, provides lots of ideas but no insight as to how these could actually be put into place. It’s easy to envision an idealistic future, but more of challenge to build one.

I am uncomfortable with Taylor’s sweeping generalizations of the graduate education system, as well as his easy-way-out viewpoint: that graduate degrees aren’t anything worth pursuing. As an employee of the Graduate Business Programs Office, I can tell you that his opinion isn’t swaying those smart enough to further their careers and educational pursuits—the applications roll in and the programs (and their graduates) are incredibly successful.

Any institution can always improve, but don’t put your plans to pursue a graduate degree to rest. Not only is the pursuit of knowledge one that should be paramount, however in these economically trying times, anything that can make you a more competitive job candidate is, indeed, worthwhile.