EDITOR:

This may seem contrary, but regarding free community college (CC) is counterproductive to a successful society. If you have a mortgage, auto loan, credit card, etc. you have “skin in the game of life”. You place a value beyond dollars in what those items can provide for you. Continuing possession requires you to act in a responsible fashion lest the quality of your life suffer. There is no free lunch… you have to pay.

Having taught in a CC for 20 years (one of my “side-hustles”) it became obvious that the students who were responsible for their education excelled, while those “on a free ride” had less motivation to do well. Some students were compensated for doing well in business courses in anticipation of promotions. Some were looking to transfer to a “B-School” after two years. Others were just filling in credit hours on a grant or work-paid remedial education. The two segments quickly became evident.

Art (photography) courses had few students looking for a career. While serious, they didn’t reflect on how the courses would effect their financial future. Anatomy courses for pre-med, nursing and other health-related careers showed significantly more commitment to achieving excellence.

My exposure to the hands-on skilled trades came from administering the apprenticeship program with input from the union for my employer (and funded thereby) showed the highest motivation to succeed from current employees seeking to further their position and paycheck. Apprenticeship courses were taught by those advanced in the field as well as those teaching such basic courses as mathematics. The success rate was high.

At job fairs and career nights recruiting for suitable candidates. All were considered however, those with “padded” resumes and unrelated experience were less successful than the one person from the LCC M-Tech program who brought me a simple cover letter and two pieces of metal intricately welded together. Guess who got a job. There are lots of employment opportunities that require more doing than thinking.

Whitmer’s proposal for free education will result in less-than optimal outcomes. Peel a few layers off that onion and you’ll find: significantly more young people will apply, they will request that non-career related courses be added (easy “A’s”) and schools will accommodate to increase revenue (tax transfer from you to them); to fill additional teaching positions, more and likely less-qualified instructors will be hired. There will be little incentive for high schools to promote excellence since success there depends in large part on the number of grads going to college. Employers will still seek the exceptional employee, but government dictated “non-discriminatory” policies will restrict hiring them. Unemployment and subsidy payments will increase (increasing taxes) because “poets don’t do plumbing”.

Education for the sake of education will prevail.

The answer I feel is to use education to support jobs and the community first. Dedication to and cooperation with local employers and residents that pay for education should be addressed to customize employment to community needs. Putting real skin in the game.

Michael A. Glass

Nahma