College Graduates’ Earnings Put Under New Scrutiny: What It Means for Higher Education
The U.S. Department of Education has introduced a new accountability measure that could significantly impact colleges and universities nationwide. This assessment, which gauges the financial success of graduates, could lead to changes in how education programs are funded.
This new policy dictates that undergraduate programs must demonstrate that their graduates earn more than non-college graduates, while graduate programs must show higher earnings than those with only a bachelor’s degree. Programs failing to meet these criteria risk losing federal student loan support.
Under Secretary of Education Nicholas Kent emphasized the importance of this measure, stating, “If a program cannot show that it leaves its graduates financially better off than if they had never enrolled, it should not be underwritten by federal taxpayers.”
The ‘do no harm’ test, as it’s known, raises questions about the fundamental purpose of college education. Is the primary goal of higher education merely to increase earning potential, or is there more to consider?
The Impact on Arts and Humanities
Critics, particularly those from the arts education sector, argue that this test may inadvertently harm creative programs. Lee Ann Scotto Adams of the Strategic National Arts Alumni Project (SNAAP) believes that focusing solely on earnings overlooks the broader value these programs provide.
Doug Dempster, SNAAP’s president, expressed concerns that such a focus could lead to cuts in essential cultural programs. “We don’t know how many artists we need, but I can guarantee that if you eliminate access, we will impoverish our cultural life nationally,” he said.
Understanding the New Standards
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act prompted this change, aiming to address rising concerns over educational costs and value. The new standard sets a minimum earnings threshold for graduates, with bachelor program graduates in many states needing to earn between $30,000 and $41,000 annually.
Christopher Madaio from The Institute for College Access & Success described the benchmark as “a very low floor,” noting that high school earnings are not a high bar to exceed.
Programs failing to meet these earnings requirements for two out of three consecutive years could lose federal support. However, the current test does not factor in student loan debt, which could affect graduates differently based on their financial obligations.
Programs at Risk
While most programs are expected to pass the test, more than 800,000 students are enrolled in programs likely to fail, with many attending for-profit schools. Data shows that certificate programs in fields like cosmetology and somatic body work face high failure rates, while certain associate degree programs also risk non-compliance.
Traditional four-year bachelor programs generally perform well, but programs in theater, music, and studio art may not meet the earnings criteria. Notably, some prestigious music schools, including The Juilliard School, might not pass the test.
Personal Stories and Broader Implications
Cindy Flores, who studied music education at Portland State University, is among many who might not have pursued her passion without federal student loans. Now teaching mariachi music, she reflects, “If it wasn’t for PSU and the loans I could get… I wouldn’t be a Mexican American mariachi teacher for my Mexican American students.”
Despite accumulating $55,000 in student loan debt, Flores values her career for its impact beyond financial gain. She asserts, “It is never about the money,” emphasizing the significant role music teachers played in her life.
Rethinking Success Metrics
SNAAP’s Lee Ann Scotto Adams argues that the government’s approach doesn’t fit creative arts graduates, whose success isn’t solely measured by earnings. Creative professionals often seek independence and cultural impact, factors not captured by simple earnings metrics.
Adams further notes that early career earnings for arts graduates can be volatile, with incomes often stabilizing over time. She warns that using earnings as the sole success metric is limited, as many graduates find personal satisfaction in their chosen careers.
The rollout of this accountability test will be gradual, providing time for at-risk programs and students to adapt. However, the changes could reshape how higher education institutions prioritize and support their programs.
