How your iPad will conquer student debt

Aristotle teaching Alexander.

College costs are out of control. Students and families are reeling under burgeoning debt. Politicians, state and federal, are rushing to feed the beast they have created. That might work.

The statistics are appalling when taken in whole. Here are a few…

• Since 1990, the cost of attending college has risen at over four time the rate of inflation
• In the last 25 years, full-time university administrators have increased 75% while student enrollment has grown only a bit over 25%
• Median pay for public-college presidents is now over $400,000 with several being paid over $1,000,000
• Since 2001, the cost to attend public college will have doubled by 2016
• In 1991, one in ten families carried tuition debt while today it is one in five, with many owing over $100,000

It’s undeniable that attending college has become as much a financial burden to the typical American family as home ownership. But, the recent housing bust included, home ownership on whole is still a long term investment that pays off. The same cannot always be said of the “investment” in a college education. Nearly half of all college grads now work in jobs that don’t require a college degree. Was that a double latte macchiato?
  

There appears to be a confluence of several trends at work here.

1. Public funding of tuition support has enabled colleges to exorbitantly increase fees and tuition
2. Colleges have greatly increased the number of dean or director-level positions dealing with equality, diversity, and related non-academic functions
3. We have encouraged all students to attend college, some who might be better served by excellent vocational schools

While we might continue down the path of publicly funding these fiefdoms, there is little hope that strategy will yield affordable results. Fortunately, there is a light on the horizon.
   

Teaching is the act of imparting knowledge. But over 2,000 years, we are using techniques that are fundamentally unchanged since Aristotle’s students sat at his feet. The internet has blown up that model by allowing a skilled professor to now instruct thousands of students at one time. Computerized courseware administers quizzes and recommends supplemental studies individually tailored to each student. Academic courses can be undertaken in the solitary environs of a student’s home, or in small study groups, or remote classrooms. The only requirement is an internet connection.
  

Simply use your favorite search engine to look for “university courses online.” You will find that many leading universities are offering internet courses, a good number for credit. Private, donation-based organizations such as the Khan Academy provide in-depth training in a wide range of topics from mathematics to history to physics to finance. For-profit companies are beginning to see the opportunity. Coursera, Inc., has partnered with 33 top universities to offer academically rigorous courses to students all over the world. 
  

Bloated colleges feeding at the public trough will soon take note. Some of them will see the opportunity and will embrace this new paradigm. The rest will see their enrollments dwindle. That’s life.

Reflections on the Boston Marathon Bombings

Dr. Richard Falk, B.S., L.L.B., S.J.D., a Princeton professor and special envoy to the United Nations, has thought deeply about America’s place in the world.  And he has come to the conclusion that the Boston Marathon bombings are our own fault. Dr. Falk thinks that America is involved in a “global domination project” and we are reaping the anger that we deserve. Of course, Dr. Falk also believes that 9/11 was a conspiracy perpetrated by the Bush administration, a view shared by other such intellectuals as Zubeidat Tsarnaev (the bombers’ mother) and TV host/comedian Rosy O’Donnell.   

The truth, as is often the case, is far simpler: violent Islamic jihadists are at war with us. Disturbingly, a growing number of plots and attacks are originating from “homegrown,” or domestic, sources.

According to a Congressional Research Service report published on January 23, 2013, there had been sixty three violent jihadist plots since September 11, 2001, four of them successful. (We know those numbers now to be sixty four and five, respectively). The CRS study did include plots hatched on foreign soil if the conspirators were American citizens or legal immigrants. It did not include those planned or attempted by foreign nationals, whether on U.S. soil or not (such as British “shoe bomber” Richard Reid).

The study included another finding of note – that the pace of these plots and attacks has increased since 2009.

What are we to make of this? What shall we do?

First and foremost, we must be honest with ourselves and recognize our adversary. The administration, in a Harry Potter-like dodge of “he-who-must-not-be-named,” refuses to acknowledge that the enemy is violent Islamic jihadism.  Case in point – the Army has classified the murder of 13 American troops and the wounding of 32 more by Nidal Malik Hasan at Fort Hood as “workplace violence.” Politically correct contortions such as these strain our credulity, causing our government to lose credibility and, thereby, our trust. 

Next, it goes without saying that Muslims at large are not the enemy. There are only a small proportion of Muslims who believe in the validity of violent jihad. And even these zealots are within their rights to hold this belief. It is the even tinier fraction of fighters who have crossed the line from thought to action, who are willing to visit unspeakable evil on innocents in the pursuit of their goals. These are the enemy, and we must name them and confront them.

Finally, we must not misjudge the threat of homegrown Islamic terrorism. It is no less real than that emanating from foreign soil. The wonder of the Internet and social media has a dark side, and that is in the ease with which ideas can be communicated and reinforced. Hasan, the afore-mentioned Fort Hood attacker, traded many emails with his mentor, Imam Anwar al-Awlaki. In one exchange, he asked al-Awalki “when [is] jihad appropriate, and [whether] is it permissible if innocents are killed in a suicide attack?” Hasan added, “I can’t wait to join you in the afterlife.”

Violent Islamic jihadism is like a virus – it jumps from mind to mind and is either embraced, amplified, or is rejected. It doesn’t infect all whom it encounters. An even smaller number of these, severely infected, are moved to action. To fight this epidemic, our best hopes lie in close relationships and cooperation with the Muslim community. They do not want to see the name of their great religion besmirched. Interfaith services and activities should be encouraged. Community policing, with proper sensitivity, is a must.

A final, important thought. While we must recognize that the inhuman evil perpetrated by the Tsarnaev brothers was a successful bombing attack, it was an abject failure as an act of terror. The people of Boston were not terrorized. Their shock and disbelief quickly morphed into cold, resolute anger: this shall not stand. It did not. And it will not.