The NY Times tells us that students who graduate from “elite” colleges could be more likely than those at less elite schools to earn more and attend a prestigious graduate school. As a result, although the initial cost may be high, the benefit, during the long term, could be worth it.
Moving from each of us to all of us, let’s ask which national education policies provide more benefit than cost. As economists, we will assume that the benefit of education is a more productive labor force that creates more economic growth. The cost would be the resources we allocate to education.
Harvard professor Benjamin Friedman, in The Moral Consequences of Economic Growth tells us, “While there is widespread agreement that the quantity of schooling represents a good use of the nation’s resources, there is no consensus on how to improve the quality of education in America.” (p. 426) Yes, each of us would say that smaller classes, better teachers, up-to-date science labs are characteristics of a better education. However Friedman says, that “measurable aspects of schooling…such as class size…bore little…connection to students’ performance…on nationally standardized cognitive tests.” Instead, he suggests a greater emphasis on the appropriate performance incentives for teachers, students, and administrators.
The Economic Lesson
For Dr. Friedman, the connection takes us to a moral society. He believed that when the benefits of economic growth are shared by many, society will become more tolerant, more ethical, and more democratic. What fuels growth? Education.
In The Wealth and Poverty of Nations, Harvard professor David Landes refers to education when he explained why certain nations have experienced an increasingly better standard of living than others. Among the variables he cites, physical capital (tools, buildings, machines) and human capital (education, entrepreneurship, and health) are most crucial for economic growth.