> Skip to content
FEATURED:
  • The Evolution of Race in Admissions
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Career Resources
Sign In
ADVERTISEMENT
The Review
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Show more sharing options
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Copy Link URLCopied!
  • Print

Fading Glory Days

By  Richard Wolin
July 2, 2012

Since the 1980s, the golden age of American higher education has been steadily fading.

In the postwar years, the GI Bill and the community-college system created opportunities for those lacking in background or resources (in many cases, both) to work their way up the educational and professional ladder. During the same period, grass-roots social movements—above all the civil-rights movement and feminism—compelled elite four-year colleges, which spend up to 10 times as much per student as public universities do, to open their doors to students whose class background or race had previously been grounds for exclusion.

Since the 1980s, however, that situation has begun to reverse itself. Under the constraints of the antitax revolt, dwindling public revenues, and, more recently, the 2008 financial crisis, we have witnessed a major withdrawal of funds from public education, whose burdensome costs must increasingly be borne by private citizens. When coupled with the burgeoning sticker price of college tuition—since 1986 tuition costs have risen by 500 percent, over four times the rate of inflation—the result is that a baccalaureate degree has increasingly become the prerogative of the most affluent Americans. Statistics show that whereas children of a family earning $90,000 or more per year stand a 50-percent chance of earning a B.A. by the age of 24, when household income drops to the $60,000-$90,000 range, the odds fall by half, to one in four. Should family income fall below $35,000, those odds plummet to one in 17.

To offset rising tuition costs, lower- and middle-income students now graduate with mammoth student-loan debts. Today the average student graduates with a daunting $23,000 in unforgivable loan debt.

The socioeconomic consequences of these trends are unambiguous and disturbing. The wave of merit-based, upward social mobility that crested during the 1960s and 70s has all but come to an end. During that period, colleges functioned as crucial mechanisms of democratization and social inclusion. Today they are repositioning themselves as bastions of class privilege and social exclusion. As tax revenues dwindle and endowments shrink, the social-egalitarian ideal of need-blind admissions has also faded. Thus college-admissions committees seek out students who can pay full tuition, allowing their qualified, penurious counterparts to fend for themselves. Public universities, for their part, are shirking their responsibilities as state-financed, land-grant institutions by increasingly opening their doors to prosperous out-of-state students, who can afford to pay much higher tuition rates.

A series of recent reports from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development places the United States last in terms of gains in college-participation rates, which measure higher education’s role in facilitating upward social mobility. In these surveys, Western European nations fare much better, since, unlike in the United States, European higher education is uniformly and generously publicly subsidized.

American society is becoming increasingly polarized: a nation of haves and have-nots. What is new is that, because of an increase in occupational stratification and social cleavage, today’s have-nots possess little in common. The decline of the manufacturing sector and the concomitant rise of post-Fordism and the service industry mean that class solidarity has precipitously decayed, allowing plutocratic elites, in conjunction with the financial sector, to attain a heretofore unprecedented level of political-economic dominance.

In sum: The 1 percent formulates the economic règles de jeu that everyone else must live by. Increasingly, those elites are politically accountable to no one but themselves. We may still live in a democracy, but increasingly, it is a democracy in name only.

We’re sorry. Something went wrong.

We are unable to fully display the content of this page.

The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network. Please make sure your computer, VPN, or network allows javascript and allows content to be delivered from c950.chronicle.com and chronicle.blueconic.net.

Once javascript and access to those URLs are allowed, please refresh this page. You may then be asked to log in, create an account if you don't already have one, or subscribe.

If you continue to experience issues, contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com

Since the 1980s, the golden age of American higher education has been steadily fading.

In the postwar years, the GI Bill and the community-college system created opportunities for those lacking in background or resources (in many cases, both) to work their way up the educational and professional ladder. During the same period, grass-roots social movements—above all the civil-rights movement and feminism—compelled elite four-year colleges, which spend up to 10 times as much per student as public universities do, to open their doors to students whose class background or race had previously been grounds for exclusion.

Since the 1980s, however, that situation has begun to reverse itself. Under the constraints of the antitax revolt, dwindling public revenues, and, more recently, the 2008 financial crisis, we have witnessed a major withdrawal of funds from public education, whose burdensome costs must increasingly be borne by private citizens. When coupled with the burgeoning sticker price of college tuition—since 1986 tuition costs have risen by 500 percent, over four times the rate of inflation—the result is that a baccalaureate degree has increasingly become the prerogative of the most affluent Americans. Statistics show that whereas children of a family earning $90,000 or more per year stand a 50-percent chance of earning a B.A. by the age of 24, when household income drops to the $60,000-$90,000 range, the odds fall by half, to one in four. Should family income fall below $35,000, those odds plummet to one in 17.

To offset rising tuition costs, lower- and middle-income students now graduate with mammoth student-loan debts. Today the average student graduates with a daunting $23,000 in unforgivable loan debt.

The socioeconomic consequences of these trends are unambiguous and disturbing. The wave of merit-based, upward social mobility that crested during the 1960s and 70s has all but come to an end. During that period, colleges functioned as crucial mechanisms of democratization and social inclusion. Today they are repositioning themselves as bastions of class privilege and social exclusion. As tax revenues dwindle and endowments shrink, the social-egalitarian ideal of need-blind admissions has also faded. Thus college-admissions committees seek out students who can pay full tuition, allowing their qualified, penurious counterparts to fend for themselves. Public universities, for their part, are shirking their responsibilities as state-financed, land-grant institutions by increasingly opening their doors to prosperous out-of-state students, who can afford to pay much higher tuition rates.

A series of recent reports from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development places the United States last in terms of gains in college-participation rates, which measure higher education’s role in facilitating upward social mobility. In these surveys, Western European nations fare much better, since, unlike in the United States, European higher education is uniformly and generously publicly subsidized.

American society is becoming increasingly polarized: a nation of haves and have-nots. What is new is that, because of an increase in occupational stratification and social cleavage, today’s have-nots possess little in common. The decline of the manufacturing sector and the concomitant rise of post-Fordism and the service industry mean that class solidarity has precipitously decayed, allowing plutocratic elites, in conjunction with the financial sector, to attain a heretofore unprecedented level of political-economic dominance.

In sum: The 1 percent formulates the economic règles de jeu that everyone else must live by. Increasingly, those elites are politically accountable to no one but themselves. We may still live in a democracy, but increasingly, it is a democracy in name only.

  • Magnifying Social Inequality
    Richard D. Kahlenberg

  • The Problem is Elsewhere
    George Leef

  • Social Life and Social Inequality
    Laura Hamilton and Elizabeth A. Armstrong

  • Fading Glory Days
    Richard Wolin

  • The Great Sorting
    Anthony P. Carnevale

  • The Role of Elite Institutions
    William Julius Wilson

  • Growing Elitism
    Thomas J. Espenshade

  • Equity and Community Colleges
    Thomas R. Bailey

  • Renewing the Commitment
    Sara Goldrick-Rab

ADVERTISEMENT

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Opinion
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
    Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
  • The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
    The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
    Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
  • Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
    Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2023 The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin