Indiana Lawmakers Target College Majors With New Bill; Critics Call It “copy-Paste” Legislation
Table of Contents
- 1. Indiana Lawmakers Target College Majors With New Bill; Critics Call It “copy-Paste” Legislation
- 2. The Core of the Debate: Return on Investment for Higher Education
- 3. Beyond Entry-Level Pay: The Long-Term Value of a Degree
- 4. The “Copy-Paste” Problem: Outside influence on Indiana Policy
- 5. Is This Legislation Solving a Real Problem?
- 6. What will happen to programs labeled as ghost majors under Indiana’s new bill?
- 7. Indiana’s New Bill Would ban “Ghost” Majors: A Copy‑Paste Disaster for Higher Ed
- 8. What are “Ghost” Majors?
- 9. The Bill’s Key Provisions: A Closer Look
- 10. Why the Controversy? Concerns from Academia
- 11. Real-World Examples & Case Studies
- 12. The Impact on Students: Navigating a Changing Landscape
- 13. Benefits of Increased Accountability
- 14. Practical Tips for Students & Institutions
Indianapolis, IN – A controversial bill currently before Indiana legislators, Senate Bill 199, proposes to eliminate college degree programs that do not demonstrate a return on investment. The legislation directs public colleges to discontinue any major where graduates earn less than individuals with only a high school diploma. However, analysts suggest the bill addresses a non-existent problem and is a product of outside influence.
The Core of the Debate: Return on Investment for Higher Education
The central argument behind Senate Bill 199 revolves around the concept of return on investment (ROI) in higher education. Proponents argue that taxpayer dollars should be allocated to programs that demonstrably led to well-paying jobs.Opponents contend that the bill oversimplifies the value of a college education and fails to account for the broader societal benefits of various fields of study.
Research from Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce indicates that even graduates of majors with lower median salaries still earn more than those with only a high school diploma.According to their data, the lowest-earning majors – including zoology, Counseling, Communications Disorders, and Theology – show median starting salaries ranging from $37,000 to $40,000 annually. This surpasses Indiana’s median income for high school graduates, which is approximately $32,000.
Beyond Entry-Level Pay: The Long-Term Value of a Degree
Experts also point out that initial earnings are not the complete picture. Many students in these fields pursue advanced degrees, significantly boosting their earning potential. As an example, a zoology graduate with a master’s degree can earn a median salary of $129,000, with the top 25% exceeding $245,000 annually. Even majors frequently enough criticized for limited job prospects, such as Philosophy, History, and Area Ethnic and Civilization Studies, show respectable starting salaries of around $46,000 to $49,000.
Here’s a comparison of median earnings for select majors and high school graduates:
| Major | Median Starting Salary | High School Graduate Median Income |
|---|---|---|
| Zoology | $37,000 – $40,000 | $32,000 |
| Counseling | $37,000 – $40,000 | $32,000 |
| philosophy | $46,000 | $32,000 |
| History | $46,000 | $32,000 |
The “Copy-Paste” Problem: Outside influence on Indiana Policy
Critics allege that Senate Bill 199 is not a locally-driven solution but rather a product of the Foundation for government Accountability (FGA), a Florida-based think tank. The FGA has been actively marketing similar legislation to states across the country, framing it as a way to improve governmental efficiency.
This practice of adopting model legislation from outside organizations is becoming increasingly common, raising concerns about the responsiveness of state government to the unique needs of its constituents. Another recent example in Indiana is senate Bill 88,which mandates teaching the “success sequence” of education,marriage,and childbearing,originating from the Institute for Family Studies. Data reveals that teen birth rates in Indiana have already decreased significantly, and high school graduation rates are at record highs, leading to questions about the necessity of such legislation.
Is This Legislation Solving a Real Problem?
Many question whether this legislation truly addresses a pressing issue. The focus on immediate salary ignores the broader value of a liberal arts education, the delayed returns on investment in certain fields, and the importance of a well-rounded citizenry.Furthermore, the bill may disproportionately impact smaller colleges and universities that offer specialized programs that cater to specific community needs.
Are Indiana legislators adequately considering the long-term implications of this bill on the state’s educational landscape, or is this simply a performative measure? Do you believe that immediate earning potential should be the primary metric for evaluating the value of a college degree?
This situation underscores a broader trend of states adopting pre-packaged legislation without sufficient local input or analysis. It begs the question: is Indiana prioritizing genuine solutions to its challenges or simply reacting to externally generated proposals?
What will happen to programs labeled as ghost majors under Indiana’s new bill?
Indiana’s New Bill Would ban “Ghost” Majors: A Copy‑Paste Disaster for Higher Ed
Indiana is poised to become the first state to possibly ban academic majors deemed to have low employment outcomes, a move sparking intense debate within the higher education landscape. House Bill 1002, currently under consideration, targets programs with a significant percentage of graduates failing to secure employment in related fields within a specified timeframe. But is this a pragmatic solution to workforce development,or a dangerous overreach that stifles academic freedom and student choice?
What are “Ghost” Majors?
The term “ghost majors,” popularized by Indiana lawmakers,refers to college degree programs that,statistically,don’t lead to readily available jobs. The bill focuses on programs where less than 50% of graduates are employed in a field related to their major within six months of graduation. This data is sourced from the state’s Commission for Higher Education.
Specifically,the bill proposes a ban on state funding for these low-performing programs,effectively phasing them out unless institutions can demonstrate a clear path to improved employment rates. Initial reports suggest programs in the humanities, arts, and some social sciences are most vulnerable.
The Bill’s Key Provisions: A Closer Look
Here’s a breakdown of the core components of House Bill 1002:
* employment Threshold: Programs falling below the 50% employment rate in their field will be flagged.
* Funding Restrictions: State funding will be withheld from identified programs.
* Institutional Response: Colleges and universities will have the possibility to appeal the decision and present a plan for advancement. This plan must demonstrate a viable strategy for increasing graduate employment.
* Transparency Requirements: Increased reporting requirements for institutions regarding graduate employment outcomes.
* Focus on Workforce Needs: The bill explicitly aims to align higher education with the state’s economic development goals and address skills gaps.
Why the Controversy? Concerns from Academia
The proposed legislation has ignited a firestorm of criticism from faculty, administrators, and student advocates. Key concerns include:
* Narrow Definition of “Employment”: Critics argue that the bill’s definition of “employment in related field” is overly restrictive.It doesn’t account for graduates who pursue further education,entrepreneurial ventures,or careers that utilize transferable skills.
* Devaluation of Liberal Arts: Manny fear the bill will disproportionately impact humanities and social science programs, which are frequently enough vital for developing critical thinking, communication, and problem-solving skills – skills highly valued by employers, even if not directly tied to a specific job title.
* Academic Freedom: Opponents contend that the bill infringes upon academic freedom by allowing the state to dictate which subjects are worthy of funding.
* Short-Term Focus: The six-month employment window is considered too short to accurately assess the long-term value of a degree. Many career paths take time to develop.
* Potential for Unintended Consequences: Eliminating programs could limit educational opportunities for students and exacerbate existing inequalities.
Real-World Examples & Case Studies
While Indiana is the first to propose such a sweeping ban,the issue of degree relevance is not new. Several states have begun to scrutinize higher education funding based on outcomes.
* Tennessee’s Performance Funding Model: Tennessee implemented a performance-based funding model in 2016, tying a portion of state funding to metrics like graduation rates and job placement. While it has shown some positive results in increasing completion rates, concerns remain about its impact on program diversity.
* florida’s Focus on STEM: Florida has prioritized funding for STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) programs, reflecting a national trend towards workforce development in these fields. This has led to increased investment in STEM education but also raised questions about the relative value placed on other disciplines.
For prospective and current students, this bill introduces significant uncertainty.
* Major Selection: Students may be discouraged from pursuing majors perceived as having lower employment prospects, even if those majors align with their passions and interests.
* Program Availability: Existing programs could be eliminated or substantially altered, limiting educational options.
* Career Counseling: Increased emphasis on career counseling and workforce planning will be crucial to help students make informed decisions and develop marketable skills.
Benefits of Increased Accountability
despite the controversy, proponents of the bill argue that it’s a necessary step towards ensuring that higher education is relevant and responsive to the needs of the Indiana economy.
* Improved Graduate Outcomes: The bill could incentivize institutions to improve program quality and focus on career preparation.
* Reduced Student Debt: By steering students towards more employable fields, the bill could help reduce student loan debt.
* Stronger Workforce: A more skilled and adaptable workforce could attract businesses and drive economic growth.
* Increased Transparency: Greater transparency in reporting graduate employment outcomes will empower students and families to make informed decisions.
Practical Tips for Students & Institutions
* students: Research potential career paths thoroughly before choosing a major.Focus on developing transferable skills like critical thinking, communication, and problem-solving. consider internships and other experiential learning opportunities.
* Institutions: Invest in robust career counseling services. Collaborate with employers to identify skills gaps and develop programs that address those needs. Demonstrate the value of all majors, including those in the humanities and arts, by highlighting the transferable
