This week I read an article published by the New York Times titled, “Why Students With Smallest Debts Have the Larger Problem”. The article discusses the fact that most of the students who fall into default after graduation are those who borrowed less than $25,000. Eventually, it is brought up that those who borrowed more for their studies graduated with a higher paying job, making their loan payments more attainable. On the other side, students who did not finish their college education have a lower borrowed amount, but also a lower paying career. Solutions to the problem, such as switching the loan payment amount to being income-based or stretching the payback frame from 10 years to 25 years, is also discussed at the end of the article. 

The lead is short and to the point, mentioning that “student borrowers owe more than $1 trillion, and seven million borrowers are in default”, a statistic that quickly catches the eye of the reader. The topic of college tuition and student loans is something that connects to a large percentage of the population; however, that does not make everything about it newsworthy. The title and the lead are very intriguing with their bold statements and impressive statistics. Once you read further, the information is interesting, but hearing that students who went to graduate school paid more for their loans and are able to pay them back because their degree got them better paying jobs than those who dropped out with no degree is just sensible information rather than “news”. 

Maybe the newsworthy question should be, why is college tuition in the United States at a level where the majority of borrowers who do not have trouble paying back their loans are doctors and lawyers?

Link to original article: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/upshot/why-students-with-smallest-debts-need-the-greatest-help.html?ref=education