'Ivory Tower' Educational

As national student loan debt soars past the trillion-dollar mark, “Ivory Tower” reveals the rapidly increasing college tuition costs in the U.S. and explores the implications of the issue, including the value of a college education. Directed and produced by Andrew R. Rossi HLS ’98, the CNN documentary examines elements of the American higher education system at all levels: college infrastructure, student attitudes, and domestic political and economic trends in the United States. While at times the organization of the film seems to be a little incohesive, its ultimate strength is that it achieves its purpose: to make the public ponder and question the institution of college in America and perhaps work towards a solution.

The film opens with a history of the four-year residential college, starting with Harvard University, the model after which most American colleges have been fashioned. But this concept, which is so familiar to so many Americans, is questioned by Stanford University professor Mitchell Stevens, who states that four-year residential colleges are “extraordinarily effective yet inefficient.” His evidence? A trillion dollars in student loan debt and disproportionate inflation of tuition since 1978. As shown in a shocking graph, college has become 1,120% more expensive, while food prices have only inflated by 244%.

Many of the problems featured in “Ivory Tower” are caused by irresponsibility, with both colleges and students at fault. The most striking one is the creation of “party pathways”: some schools cater to students by creating environments not for learning but for partying. In one of the most compelling sequences of the documentary, interviews with authors, professors, and even concerned students who condemn prioritizing partying over studying are interwoven with clips of the debauchery itself. The issue is ultimately one of cultural attitudes: too many students value partying over an actual education, and colleges support their poor value systems. Worst of all, it doesn’t seem like change will happen anytime soon—the president of Arizona State University, an infamous “party school,” seemed totally nonchalant about encouraging students to focus more on academics in an interview.

"Ivory Tower" explores the worth of a college education in an era of rising costs and mounting national student debt. By COURTESY SAMUEL GOLDWYN FILMS

The perceived waste and excess don’t stop there. In a striking montage, “Ivory Tower” depicts the luxury facilities that students now demand, such as rock climbing walls and tanning beds. In response, colleges build aimlessly in an “arms race” of infrastructure at the students’ cost. Woven into “Ivory Tower” are shots of the Cooper Union, a design school in New York City founded upon the premise that students receive full scholarships. The college borrowed too extensively to construct a new $175 million engineering building that it could not afford and ran a significant deficit. Ultimately, the school began charging tuition, sparking a two-month-long student occupation of the Office of the President. This ordeal was one of the most compelling and engaging arcs of the film, and although the students ultimately failed to achieve their original goal, their endeavors added a much-needed inspiring and uplifting aspect to a film meant to criticize current society.

“Ivory Tower” also explores another question: if traditional college is so expensive, why do we need it at all? In fact, attending college has both a monetary cost and an opportunity cost of time. There are indeed alternatives, including a fellowship from PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, which pays highly qualified young entrepreneurs $100,000 to drop out of college to work on a research project, foundation, or startup. On the other side of the spectrum, Deep Springs College is a unique two-year program that interweaves tough manual labor with a strong education based in philosophy and morality. But despite their strong merits, the problem with these sorts of programs is their limited range—few students have the right personality traits and qualifications to pursue education in these alternative formats, and even fewer are willing to take a chance on them.

After exploring all of these ideas in rapid succession, it’s not immediately clear which solution to the higher education crisis “Ivory Tower” argues for. The documentary asserts that the most fulfilling sort of education is the traditional liberal arts system, but it’s only offered by the best of schools and appreciated by the most motivated students. Even then, as conceded by Wesleyan College President Michael S. Roth, there is no guarantee of solid employment. Free education in the United States is purely a pipe dream, as shown by the troubled Cooper Union. And not attending college certainly might be possible for some but definitely not for an “average” student. The future seems grim with no solution in sight.

But that’s precisely the strength of “Ivory Tower.” All of the parties—students, colleges, legislators—are responsible in some way for the predicament into which college students are thrown headfirst. No one party can individually effect a better higher education system: any change that can occur must be a collective shift of attitude in all of society. This can only occur with widespread public awareness and concern regarding the college tuition crisis. And in that regard, the thought-provoking open-endedness of “Ivory Tower” is extremely effective, if a bit roundabout. It’s exactly what America needs.

—Contributing writer Patrick H. Pan can be reached at patrickpan@college.harvard.edu.