ParaPundit argues (and he is by no means the first) that we spend cartloads of

money to get our kids through college because we don’t want employers

giving aptitude tests:

“Fools argue that since people who get college degrees do better then
the solution is to send more people to college. But a college
education is just a proxy for a higher level of intelligence. The
preference employers have for college graduates is a preference for
higher intelligence employees. A repeal of the foolish US Supreme
Court decision Griggs v. Duke Power would allow employers to use IQ
tests instead and reduce what is effectively a big tax on the economy
levied by educrats. This would save a lot of time and money now wasted
on education that does not provide either marketable skills or real
insights.”

As a parent facing two sets of college fees quite soon, I am

exceptionally receptive to the idea that most college education is a

waste of time and money. However, there seems to me a flaw in this

argument. The scope of Griggs v. Duke Power (which was in 1971, btw)

does not extend beyond the boundaries of the USA; yet other countries

are just as college-credential-obsessive as we are. In China, for

instance, employers could select by aptitude or IQ testing to their

hearts’ content; yet degree snobbery is even more rampant there than

here. (See, for e.g., Annie Wang’s book The People’s Republic of Desire, which I have just been reading.)

Am I missing something? Anyone got thoughts on this? Come on,

please; I really want to believe that for most students, college

education is a crock, but Griggs v. Duke just doesn’t seem to me to be

the whole story.