Can a state reduce the costs of education while simultaneously expanding and subsidizing its demand? Virginia’s plan to become the “Best Educated State by 2030” implicitly raises this question.

The latest annual report from the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia provides an update on the state’s long-term vision for students. The plan centers on an unquestioning commitment to expand the number of college degrees attained by Virginians. Overall, the plan relies on traditional assumptions about the value of higher ed as the state makes a progressive push to expand academic participation.

The Council’s report reveals a key assumption by stating, “Virginia faces a future in which higher education will play an increasingly important role.” The plan asserts postsecondary degrees are essential for successful employment. The report cites a Georgetown study which found that “of the 11.5 million new jobs created since the great recession, 99% require workers with more than a high-school education.”

The plan also notes the net economic improvement and welfare of degree-holding citizens compared to those with less education.

Given these assumptions, the state has set a goal of a 70% education threshold by 2030, where 60% of Virginians hold an associate’s degree (or greater), and an additional 10% attain some type of postsecondary certificate. The current combined total is 51%. Overall, Virginia aims to award 1.5 million degrees and certificates by 2030.

Commendably, the state has laid out specific targets for 2030 which allow for measured progress. These six benchmarks track:

Number of awards (degrees and certificates) granted Reducing the gap in completion rates between traditional students and “underrepresented populations” Affordability Research expenditures Price Economic returns (wage growth)

The report frankly acknowledges only the first two of these goals are currently on target to match the goals for 2030.

Embed from Getty Images

The Affordability metric sets a low and concerning threshold: “Meet half the cost of attendance for low- and middle-income students through expected family contribution and state and federal grant aid by 2030.” In other words, the state envisions a better world where a commingling of federal, state, and personal money accounts for half of the cost of college for a middle-class student. The report goes on to explain that progress towards affordability is currently off-target, in part due to a decline in state funding.

The similar Price metric tracks a goal of keeping tuition and fees below 10% of annual family income for low- and middle-class students. The current rate is 11%, slightly higher than the national average. For 2017-18, the average cost of tuition and fees among four-year public institutions in Virginia is $12,702, almost 5% more than last year.

Virginia’s spending on Research in 2013 amounted to 2.12% of national state research expenditures. The plan has a goal of increasing this share by 30%. To date, the share has actually decreased slightly.

For Economic returns, the plan aims for “75% of graduates [to] earn sustainable wages three years after graduation,” where sustainable wages are defined as a minimum of 200% of the national poverty level. For the past three years, 72% of state graduates have met this threshold.

Considering these goals and limited progress to date, the Council offers many recommendations. These include increasing state spending on higher education (currently $5,139 per student), capping the rate of increase of non-tuition fees at 3%, and improving efficiency in credit transfers from community colleges.

In a rare mention of alternative education, the Council also recommends restoring funding for the state’s prior workforce credential program, which allowed for industry-based certifications.

The report also acknowledges the need to better prepare graduates with respect to employers’ needs. The Council has committed to “monitor public institutions’ efforts to assess student learning in the core areas of critical thinking, written communication, quantitative reasoning and civic engagement.”

According to the Council, Virginia spends over $8 billion annually on higher education.

*********

While laudable for its noble goals and for its transparent commitment to measure progress, Virginia’s plan includes questionable assumptions and logical inconsistencies.

First, is it appropriate to expand higher ed within an economy where 99% of the decent jobs require a postsecondary degree? Does that statistic indicate a problem in higher education or in lower education?

Second, in the Council’s view, “education” equates with “certification.” This is not unusual. We are told good employers require such certification, even as employers complain that certified graduates do not satisfy expectations. Yet the assumption is that well into 2030 and beyond, employers will continue to rely on the output of the state’s educational system, especially after a few adjustments.

The report also implies that with some minor improvements in the numbers, and perhaps assisted by more public funding, students will continue to pay expensive tuition and take on considerable debt burdens. Other than the passing reference to workforce certification, the Council’s report does not consider the possibility that businesses and future employees might bypass expensive state institutions altogether and take on more direct responsibility through alternative education.

Third, in its pursuit of a population where 70% of citizens have achieved degrees, the state fails to anticipate “degree inflation” and the consequences of such a broad distribution of credentials. In theory, an insatiable employer demand might remain, taking on as many employees as the state can certify. More likely, discriminating employers will seek new ways to distinguish among candidates and will continue the trend of favoring master’s and other postgraduate degrees as they screen resumes. As college replaces high school as an essential requirement for employment, post-grad becomes the new college.

Last, the plan challenges economic truths by seeking to reduce prices while simultaneously working to expand and subsidize demand. How can tuition and fees decrease in such an environment? Presumably, Virginia aims to at least reduce the student’s portion of costs as they are offset by increased state funding (from other taxpayers). However, as it only targets reductions in the rates of increase, the plan accepts as given that prices will continue to rise.

Is Virginia’s plan visionary or outdated? Let us know your thoughts.