Higher education believers and skeptics–who are they?

Americans are split on the value of education beyond high school. In our latest nationally representative survey, Varying Degrees, we found that Americans are made of two halves: one half who strongly believes in the economic and social benefits of postsecondary credentials and the other half who don’t see much benefit. We call them: higher education believers and skeptics.[1] These two halves not only differ in terms of their political views and certain demographic traits, but they also show distinct perspectives about certain aspects of higher education.

Varying Degrees, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, this year for the first time asked Americans for their perspectives on the benefits that having postsecondary credentials can bring to individuals and communities. The questions and responses were adapted from the work of the Postsecondary Value Commission’s value framework developed by the Institute for Higher Education Policy and the Gates Foundation. The findings show that a majority of Americans overall agree that individuals with undergraduate credentials such as associate or bachelor’s degrees fare better and contribute more to their communities than those without credentials, especially those outcomes related to jobs and financial security (see Figures 1, 2). But they are more split about the benefits to one's health and life satisfaction.

Though in the aggregate a majority of Americans see the value of higher education, nuances occur when we see how responses cluster, revealing our higher education believers and skeptics (see Figure 3). While most higher education believers would agree in the value of credentials both to individuals and their communities, skeptics feel more mixed. More than 90 percent of higher education believers think that those with some type of undergraduate credential, whether it’s a certificate, an associate or a bachelor’s degree, have better access to jobs with a livable wage, greater earnings, greater financial well-being and more opportunities to build wealth. Eighty-six and 77 percent respectively think individuals with undergraduate credentials are more satisfied with the communities where they live, and are healthier (see Figure 4). On the other hand, only 43 percent of higher education skeptics think that these individuals will have greater job availability, 46 percent think they have greater earnings, and 37 percent think they have more financial well-being. Only one in four and one in five skeptics believe that having undergraduate credentials will lead to greater satisfaction with their lives and better health.

When considering the benefits that those with undergraduate credentials bring to the communities, however, the gaps in responses between believers and skeptics are much narrower. Almost all believers think individuals with undergraduate credentials would contribute more to the tax revenue of their communities, to strengthening their workforce, and to providing more job opportunities (see Figure 5). A majority of higher education skeptics, while at a lower rate compared to believers, also agree.

Believers also feel more confident about institutions of higher education in the US. Seven in ten believers think that colleges and universities are having a positive effect on the way things are going in the country (see Figure 6). On the other hand, skeptics are more split on this matter: only half think colleges are having a positive effect. More skeptics than believers think that adults in the U.S. only need a high school diploma at a minimum to ensure financial security (40 percent of skeptics compared to 25 percent of believers). Having said that, a majority of skeptics still agree that Americans need to earn at least a technical certificate (see Figure 7).

Roughly two in five higher education believers (43 percent) identify as Democrats, while a third of skeptics (34 percent) identify as Republicans (see Figure 8). Both groups, however, have a significant share of people who identify as independent (24 percent). When it comes to ideology, nearly half of both groups would consider themselves moderate, although more believers than skeptics consider themselves liberal (30 percent of believers vs. 19 percent of skeptics), and conversely, more skeptics than believers consider themselves conservative (33 percent of skeptics vs. 22 percent of believers) (see Figure 9). These findings indicate that a person’s political identification and ideology can influence but doesn’t necessarily determine how they feel about the value of an education after high school.

It’s also worth noting that while nearly half of skeptics only have up to high school diploma or equivalent, 70 percent of believers have at least some college (see Figure 10). When it comes to earnings, considerably more believers than skeptics have household earnings of more than $100,000 (see Figure 11).

Knowing how higher education believers and skeptics can differ and align with each other can help policymakers and advocates craft the right message to effectively target these groups. The findings show that Americans can be squarely divided into two groups based on their opinions of the benefits higher education can bring, and while the two groups can differ in many ways, there is common ground in their perspectives of higher education value.

Even though more believers than skeptics believe strongly in both the individual and societal benefits of higher education, a majority of skeptics still agree that individuals with higher education credentials contribute a great deal to their communities. A high number of skeptics also believe it’s easier for people with higher levels of credentials to find a well-paying and stable career. It’s also notable that, while believers are more likely to be Democrats and skeptics are more likely to be Republicans, nearly half of each group said they hold moderate views. Hence, messages targeting skeptics should amplify the societal and community benefits of higher education, while explaining how the benefits for the individual is intertwined with the community.

[1] You can read more about the cluster analysis and its methodology here.