"Forbes" Ranks BYU No. 1 as Best Value College in America

It’s the best value for LDS students, who are required to adhere to certain standards, including the paying of tithing, or risk expulsion. I have no doubt the system is in place to guarantee the Church a hefty return on their investment. Compared with other universities, they operate on an “alternative revenue stream”.

That being said, I think most every other private college is all about getting the most profits up front. It’s not a good deal for students. I really hope, and think we will, completely change our current secondary education system. Education beyond high school doesn’t make a lot of sense, and a lot of companies are forming their own “universities” (from Google to McDonalds), which cater their education towards a specific skill set, rather than giving a “general education”, thinking it’ll prepare students for the workforce. Plus, online education is becoming a lot cheaper, more effective, and more lucrative.

But maybe I’m biased. I earned one of the toughest degrees from BYU, and couldn’t find a job that paid more than $17 an hour (after three years of searching), completely unrelated to what I studied. So I took some time off, went through a bunch of online courses in programming, built up a portfolio… and in six-months of non-formal education wound up with a job that I love, and pays a LOT more. And the company I work for (which is incredibly good to us), straight up doesn’t care if you have a degree. They only care if you know how to do the work.

My wife graduated from BYU 15 years ago. She felt that the teachers were also very good. She said that several of her teachers were not in it for the money. They had done very well in their industries, retired relatively young, and saw teaching at BYU as their way of giving back to the next generation of young church members.

Cultural issues aside (although some are large), BYU-P is an exceptional bargain, with excellent academics.

BYU-H is a good academic bargain in an island location.

BYU-I is a financial bargain.

I say “ouch” when I read this. But I know its probably true for BYU-I and many schools in which there is an “open” admissions policy or where the university isn’t at capacity.

I work at a school with some very excellent students, but also our share of underperforming students. We put a lot of resources into helping the underperforming students.

I wish there was a way of turning underperforming people into strong performers, reliably. I am in the trenches with it every week, trying to motivate, inspire, and help people elevate themselves. There is some impact, but ultimately the individual must have a spark or drive to learn. As academics, we can only do so much to help people.

I recall investing significant, quality tutoring hours with some students. After several hours I realized their problem was memory. They could not remember concepts long enough to apply them properly. I reverted to memory techniques to help them, and they could remember for the session, and do the work, but next time I saw them a few days later, they couldn’t remember the concepts/formulas/processes enough to apply them again — I had to start over again. The learning was never even semi-permanent.

Example, I hold a weekly WebEx meeting for my online students. There are 20 of them in a typical course. Usually 0-2 people of the entire class actually show for these meetings. Yes, they are optional and recorded, but few even watch the recording afterwards. We have a lot of other resources available, and many go unused in spite of evangalizing them to the students.

For some students, it’s as if education is something everyone wants, but they want to minimize the effort involved in acquiring it. From Curt’s explanation above, it sounds like BYU-I has a lot of students that are not strong performers….so it’s not a great academic experience. Or maybe it’s the professors, curriculum or absence of rigor? Anyway, I’d like to know more about BYU-I and why it’s a financial deal, but not a great academic experience…

I wish there was an open discussion forum like StayLDS for academics where ideas could be bandied around. I hate to blame it all on the students in more open admissions schools, but the preparedness and native ability of students DOES have an impact on how much I can impart as a professor, and just how much universities can expect to accomplish.

Also, I think BYU-I is an undergraduate college as well, and undergraduates typically don’t perform as well as graduate students. Yes, there is variation around the mean. But as one academic said, “education takes a while before students blossom”.

Again, not a STayLDS thing, but something Curt’s post above brings to mind.

BYU-I serves a real need, and I don’t mean to diss it through the description above. There are excellent students who attend, but it functions largely as a place for decent or average students to get a four-year degree while being “nurtured in the Gospel”. It is open enrollment, so it serves almost anyone who wants a four-year degree. It also is a good setting for the Pathways program to be offered at such a crazy cheap cost.

I am grateful the Church expanded Ricks and made it a four-year BYU institution, but I doubt it ever will be known as an excellent or even above average college – and I actually am fine with that. I am glad the Church is trying to educate all members who want a degree.

Also, SD, you are correct about inherent ability being a huge factor in college success. I wish there were more public, low-cost trade options for students who really shouldn’t be incurring debt to pursue a four-year degree.

dande48, while I think there is a self-serving aspect, the Church has strsssed education for since the beginning, long before the BYUs were expanded. I truly do believe the core motivation is based on the idea that the glory of God is intelligence and Jospeh Smith’s obsession with learning.

I truly do believe the core motivation is based on the idea that the glory of God is intelligence and Jospeh Smith’s obsession with learning.

But it’s education with a Church/doctrinal emphasis. Most classes begin with a prayer. Every biology class started with a week or two going over documents and essays on the Church’s stance on evolution. Religion courses are required; at least one a semester. It’s education specifically geared towards supporting the Church, not education for education’s sake. There are strong incentives and pressures on non-lds students to convert, but converting from LDS to another religion will get you expelled.

I really think that scripture should be read as “The glory of God is Church-sanctioned and approved intelligence”. Historically, any kind of learning which goes against what’s been taught over-the-pulpit has been actively crusaded against… until the day the Church claims it’s what they believed all along.

But it’s education with a Church/doctrinal emphasis. Most classes begin with a prayer. Every biology class started with a week or two going over documents and essays on the Church’s stance on evolution.

Having a child who just received a degree from the College of Life Sciences I have to say that if this was one time the case, it is no longer. He came home his first semester at BYU with a testimony of evolution. Evolution is freely and openly discussed and accepted by the Life Science faculty, several of whom I have met. Even the Bean Museum now has an evolution display section. And FWIW, the Church has no official stance on evolution.

But it’s education with a Church/doctrinal emphasis. Most classes begin with a prayer. Every biology class started with a week or two going over documents and essays on the Church’s stance on evolution. Religion courses are required; at least one a semester. It’s education specifically geared towards supporting the Church, not education for education’s sake. There are strong incentives and pressures on non-lds students to convert, but converting from LDS to another religion will get you expelled.

I really think that scripture should be read as “The glory of God is Church-sanctioned and approved intelligence”. Historically, any kind of learning which goes against what’s been taught over-the-pulpit has been actively crusaded against… until the day the Church claims it’s what they believed all along.

In fairness, I do think it’s a mix. They have good medical schools, research in areas that are non-doctrinal etcetera. But GBH comment that he likes education because it “increases members’ capacity to serve in the church” sounds good to a traditional believer, but not to me. It sounded way to church-centered for my liking — particularly given my own experiences where the church goes after its own interests every time, when there is a conflict between member interests and individual interests on temporal matters(in my experience). I know that academics are on a very short leash in their research, particularly in their religion department or proximal areas.

So, we can’t ignore the strong self-interest the church has in education, and I guess we can’t blame them necessarily since they subsidize it — within reason.

Can you give us a reference to GBH’s statement SD? I don’t doubt he said it, it’s in line with the types of things he said, but I’d like to read it in context and don’t have all day to search.

I do have one other observation about education in the church. My ward does have some highly educated people – a doctor or two, some engineers, a lawyer, etc. But I realized a few years ago that all of the educated people were either born in the church or were converted fairly young and gained their education after joining the church. IOW, those we’re baptizing are generally not educated and we’re not baptizing doctors, lawyers, and engineers (at least not here). Aside from the social implications of that, the idea of the church’s emphasis on education is quite clear – and not all those people are in church leadership positions (and I’m really glad the dentist is not).

DJ — I did a quick look and couldn’t find it. I remember it was at a Conference and I believe it was during some open remarks he was making about the church in general. It was within the last 14 years. He has also said education is the “door to opportunity” and other things. But in this instance above he mentioned he likes education because it improves people’s ability to serve in the church. End of the story. Sorry I am not more help, but I also find searching for stuff frustrating in LDS.org.