Credentialism is destroying academia. Professors have been under pressure for decades to lower their standards, avoid making their courses difficult, and to teach things with obvious vocation relevance. Humanities departments are being slashed. General education requirements have been weakened.
Eventually, employers will realize that two-year degrees are as good as four-year degrees when it comes to vocational training. If a four-year degree represents nothing more than vocational training, why bother requiring one when a two-year degree generally suffices? By catering to credentialism and caving to student demands for vocational training, universities have set themselves up for a disaster.
> If a four-year degree represents nothing more than vocational training, why bother requiring one when a two-year degree generally suffices?
Because a debt-laden employee is a docile, loyal employee?
If you need the job badly to meet your basic obligations, you'll probably make fewer demands on the employer.
Not sure why you are conflating credentialism and vocational training; a big part of the problem is that these two are very different things. That is, students invest 4 years and tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars and end up with a piece of paper that can get them in the door, but no useful skills.
