Now that I have your attention, I can say that I am thankful that he appears to no longer be a driving factor in higher education.
I am the parent of a white, male (but not rich) student who will shortly be entering some sort of post-secondary education. The exact form of the rest of his education has not yet been decided, but it will not be Ivy League for a lot of reasons. I can say with confidence that my (and his) lived experience is confirmed by both Cottom (2019), as well as more recently by Dubner (2022a & 2022b). They both state that white male enrolment in post-secondary education has declined for a few decades now and white men no longer make up the majority of higher education learners. Dubner (2022a) states that education at schools like City University of New York (CUNY) has done a better relative job at creating income mobility than Ivy League universities, and historically for more diverse groups of learners. Because of this access to higher education by women, people of color (POC), and people in other marginalized groups, those groups push better overall societal outcomes (for everyone, not just students) than private university attendance by wealthy white men.
I therefore agree with Cottom (2019) when she discusses digital accessibility and not making assumptions about incoming students’ digital competence or skills. This is coherent with Dubner’s (2022b) discussion about how Ivy League-style higher education is not congruent with typical ‘boy’ behavior, and by extrapolation, the behavior of anyone in any group who does not fit into an upper class or upper middle class social group from where these schools draw their students. As the parent of a skilled trades-focused adolescent, I cannot ever imagine him attending a philosophy class or discussing world history or joining the American-style Greek system. I can, however, see him learning how to operate a robotic welder in a high-risk environment. These are the kinds of skills and ‘shoulds’ in EdTech 3.0 that Cottom (2019) discusses as needing to become more accessible to the vast majority of learners who will attend skills-based schools. Dubner’s guest, Ruth Simmons, further confirms this when she discusses self-actualization as a ‘should’ of learning (2022) that I would argue is exactly what Cottom (2019) means.
So, what about the rich, white, male student? Thankfully, he is no longer at the centre of higher education, which suits me fine because he does not represent most of our society. His dominance over what education ‘should’ be is hopefully done for good and we can all realize our full potentials as we come into EdTech 3.0 (Cottom, 2019).
References:
Dubner, S. (20 April 2022a). What Exactly Is College For? Freakonomics. From https://freakonomics.com/podcast/what-exactly-is-college-for/
Dubner, S. (18 May 2022b). What Is the Future of College—And Does It Have Room for Men? Freakonomics. From https://freakonomics.com/podcast/what-is-the-future-of-college-and-does-it-have-room-for-men/
Cottom, T. (26 August 2019). Rethinking the Context of Edtech. (n.d.). From https://er.educause.edu/articles/2019/8/rethinking-the-context-of-edtech