Most revealing was data reflecting that median first-year earnings for those with AAS
degrees were on average $7,000 above those who earned bachelor degrees. This data snap shot is sure to bolster the
community college marketing of CTE programs as an important, critical and
viable path to securing good middle class jobs. While the data certainly
reflects the value and importance of CTE programs, life-time earnings generally
tend to start off more slowly for those with a four year education but
generally out pace those with AAS degrees in the long run.
I found the release of the College Measures data and an
article published in the NY Time a few days ago to be very timely. The article
entitled The
Great Aid Gap highlights the regulation that allocates student aid for
those in traditional degree programs but does not make eligible for aid those
who are in short-term credit or non-credit industry aligned certificate
programs.
True, many non-credit and continuing educational programs at
various schools may be considered skills directly related to workforce training
for those already employed in their respective industries, and many people who
take these classes have the financial means to pay directly for them. However,
as someone who does a lot of out-reach at locations like our local workforce centers,
I can see the value of allowing student access to federal student aid who are
seeking short term industry aligned trainings. Many of these students do not
have the means to fund short term certificate programs and must seek assistance
via other more restrictive programs like the Department of Labor’s (i.e. W.I.A)
dislocated worker fund.
As new data continues to reflect the economic value of
shorter term degrees and certificates, I wonder what national effort should be
directed toward opening up the possibility of financial aid eligibility for
programs that prove a viable path to obtain industry skills that lead to
employment. True, many certificate
programs and all AAS degrees are financial aid eligible, but many are not:
Examples include C.N.A. training, project management certificates, some short
term precision machining certificates, etc. In fact, as the article reveals,
many white papers produced for the Malinda Gates Foundation suggest many
strategies for overhauling financial aid.
While those suggested strategies would be great fodder for
another post, I feel it’s worth considering
the outdated provision of financial aid that exclude eligibility for
very relevant and in demand training programs. These restrictions often exclude certain
programs that provide viable options for adults of all ages seeking training
that can help them quickly adapt and keep current in the ever present changing
labor market. The Pell Grant needs to
remain fully intact as a vehicle of opportunity for low income families to achieve
a four year education and to be clear, I’m not in favor of limiting aid for
those on the traditional educational path by increasing aid to programs not now
eligible. However, aren’t we limiting access and options for low income
families who seek to begin their educational path with a shorter term
post-secondary certificate?