The Case Against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money

by Bryan Caplan

For a single individual, education pays. On this point, the standard “education as skill creation” and the “education as signaling” theories agree. The theories make different predictions, however, about what happens if average education levels decline. If education is all skill creation, a fall in average education saps our skills, impoverishing the world. If education is all signaling, however, a fall in average education leaves our skills—and the wealth of the world—unchanged. In fact, cutbacks enrich the world by conserving valuable time and resources.

The thought of education cuts horrifies most people because “we all benefit from education.” I maintain their horror rests on what logicians call a fallacy of composition—the belief that what is true for a part must also be true for the whole. The classic example: You want a better view at a concert. What can you do? Stand up. Individually, standing works. What happens, though, if everyone copies you? Can everyone see better by standing? No way.

If schools boost students’ income by teaching useful job skills, why do they entrust students’ education to people so detached from the real world? How

The labor market doesn’t pay you for the useless subjects you master; it pays you for the preexisting traits you reveal by mastering them.

Mark and Steve’s vignette shows that education signals not just intelligence, but conscientiousness—the student’s discipline, work ethic, commitment to quality, and so forth.

The vignette’s lesson: education also signals conformity—the worker’s grasp of and submission to social expectations.

Now we’re up to three broad traits that education signals: intelligence, conscientiousness, and conformity.

Why do employers seek this package? Because the road to academic success and the road to job success are paved with the same materials. An intelligent worker learns quickly and deeply. A conscientious worker labors until the job’s done right. A conformist worker obeys superiors and cooperates with teammates. If you lack the right stuff to succeed in school, you probably lack the right stuff to succeed in the labor market.

If you want the labor market to recognize your strengths, and most of the people who share your strengths hold a credential, you’d better earn one too.

Higher education is the only product where the consumer tries to get as little out of it as possible.

Question: How would your career have been different if you flunked all the classes you’ve forgotten?

If employers rewarded well-educated workers for skills alone, failing a class and forgetting a class would have identical career consequences. They plainly don’t. Take me. After three years of Spanish homework, Spanish exams, and Spanish presentations, I remember nearly nada. Yet if I had failed high school Spanish, I couldn’t have gone to a good college, wouldn’t have gotten into Princeton’s Ph.D. program, and probably wouldn’t be a professor. Luckily, I learned enough to get As on my report card.

Easy As. Students struggle to win admission to elite schools. Once they arrive, however, they hunt for professors with low expectations. A professor who wants to fill a lecture hall hands out lots of As and little homework.43 On the popular Rate My Professors website, students grade their professors’ “easiness,” “helpfulness,” “clarity,” and “hotness,” not “marketable skills taught” or “real-world relevance.”44 If human capital purists are right, why do students struggle to get into the best schools, then struggle to avoid acquiring skills once they arrive?

Why do students rejoice when the teacher cancels class? Teachers