Do you believe that premise? Did the author give any facts to substantiate that premise? What is the experience of your friends? What do you feel? (By the way, please cite the date and if possible the date and author of the article)

The article was published on August 31, 2011. Sorry, I could not find the author name. I do believe that learning and knowledge is always valuable.

Universities' 3-folds functions are instruction, research and extension. The pillars of our university are scholarship, leadership, character and service. These, I believe, are enough proof that our higher education goes beyond economic/business needs.

@Anirban, yes, knowledge is always valuable. As I could not find the article You have mentioned, I have found something similar, the link follows. Let me quote the following:"Maybe you can’t put a price on education but a new survey says you can establish a value and it’s not as high as it used to be."!

http://business.financialpost.com/2013/08/26/the-value-of-education-is-dropping-fast-for-university-graduates/

I personally do not believe that university education should always garantee entry into the job market. Instead it should garantee graduates to be innovative enough to create jobs for themselves and others. the point is that as a graduate one should be highly critical of their social space to an extent of being able to see gaps that those already in the job market are unable to see. Therefore they can initiate measures to fill those gaps.

Here in the U.S., many people rely on a college (i.e., undergraduate university) to finish out the education that they did not properly receive in high school. Teaching at a public university in the American west, I had to spend half my time doing remedial work in the basic skills of reading (analysis of content), writing (grammar, paragraph formation, structuring a simple argument), and critical thinking, before we even got to our course content. Students' lack of preparation is a major problem at public universities in the poorer states, but is also present to a disconcerting degree even at private institutions where one would expect incoming students to be better prepared (given their comparative economic advantage). And this is far from being an American problem: colleagues in other countries now complain of having to do an increasing amount of remedial teaching. Until people can be assured that attending high school will enable them to achieve genuine competency in the basic skills named above, a university education is still necessary to their becoming fully functional in society and able to participate in their country's economy.

As an academic advisor, I see many students who, as described above in Alice Cheang's post come to a university poorly prepared for the rigors of a higher education.  Their lack of preparation is detrimental to their success in college and we see many students drop out.  Also, from a financial perspective, under-prepared students find their financial aid being consumed by the many remedial courses they are required to take in order to bring their grade point average up the institutional minimum requirement before they can begin to work on their chosen program of study.  While I agree that a high school education should shore up shore up basic competency levels for students moving forward, I also believe that the elementary/primary schools play an even bigger part in this equation. Competency based learning really starts at the elementary/primary level and students need to have a more structured learning experience that will prepare them for high school and beyond.  Perhaps a solution can be found in forging solid relationships between elementary/primary schools - high schools - colleges/universities: aligning curriculum so that certain skill sets are built upon at each level?

I could not agree more with both Felicita, Alice and Langutani even though I want to disagree with them and be able to agree with Eddie but I cannot.  

I would argue that many parents and students would feel that way and probably do (mostly parents). I ask however, after a generation of workforce training or three generations of workforce training what would happen to knowledge creation, social policy discussions, discussions on justice, equity, and law? Healthcare, gender, and the dismantling of race, stereotypes, and gender discrimination.

These are all consequences I argue that would happen  by connecting higher education to job placement but I am afraid we already see this happing. Employers (large multinational corps) demanding a certain skill set be taught rather than the ability to critically think. The submissive of our graduating students in higher ed, and the shameful acceptance of the status quo by our masters and PhD. students. The value of being educated is lost in the fear of no pay check and until that issue is addressed no amount of romamticism well be enough to create a just society.

Douglas

It is my understanding, based on various news reports, that most of the jobs in America today do not require a college education.  Arum and Roksa, in their latest research, provided data to support these reports; they found that about 23% of recent graduates in their study were unemployed.  Another 17% were working part-time or at low-paying jobs.

One could argue that these staggering numbers do not render higher education "meaningless."  We professors like to believe that the education students receive makes them better, more interesting people.  This belief, of course, is based on another--that we are actually educating students.  In ACADEMICALLY ADRIFT, Arum and Roksa's first book published a couple of years ago, the researchers challenged this belief, reporting quite a bit of evidence indicating that our foundational belief is not supportable.

I would suggest that Alice and Felicita are on the right track, even though I would argue that lack of adequate preparation is just one factor among several that limits how much meaning can be found in higher education.  it is, nevertheless, a huge factor.  In the States, 60-70% of all entering students test remedial in reading, writing, and math.  Their deficiencies in many instances are so great that 5 or 6 years of undergraduate education (the 4-year degree has all but disappeared) is unable to bring these students up to a level at which the term "meaningful" can be applied in any substantive way.