Education & Opportunity 1 week Formal Seminar Data Analysis

How Should We Deal with College Student Debt?

Students are about to take on this debt themselves, which makes it the most immediately practical week in the Year 1 rotation — and the least abstract. Half of it is simply learning how the system works: subsidised against unsubsidised, why student loans survive bankruptcy, who actually holds the biggest balances. The other half is one idea that reframes every forgiveness argument: money the government gives to one group comes from everyone else, including people who paid their own loans off and the majority who never went to college at all.

Open the student page for this topic

Slide Deck

Open teacher deck

RISC teacher deck · ASU Prep seminar Drive

Digital Notebook

Make your own copy

Opens a copy in your own Google Drive

Debt by State

Interactive Map

Average debt by state and institution

01 / Plan

One-Week Instructional Plan

The Year 1 rhythm, with a heavier-than-usual Monday. The deck's teaching note is emphatic: the landscape of college loans is complicated, and it is worth spending real time building a shared factual understanding before anyone argues about policy. Students cannot debate forgiveness sensibly until they know what a subsidised loan is.

Monday
Data Analysis

How the System Actually Works

Free write (5 min): what do you already expect college to cost you, and how do you expect to pay for it? This is one of the few seminar topics where students' own plans are the subject matter.

The vocabulary, which the deck lays out carefully because everything downstream depends on it:

  • Institution types — two-year colleges, four-year public, four-year private non-profit, and four-year for-profit. The last category matters more than students expect.
  • Cost terms — tuition and fees; room and board; gross or published costs, before grants and discounts; and net costs, after them. The gap between published and net is where most confusion lives.
  • Degree types — associate's and bachelor's at undergraduate level; professional degrees, master's, and doctorates at graduate level.

How the loans work:

  • Direct subsidised loans — for students who qualify for financial aid, at rates below what a bank would offer, with the government paying the interest while you're in school and during the grace period.
  • Direct unsubsidised loans — available to anyone regardless of need, at the same rate, but the borrower owes all the interest, including while enrolled.
  • Private loans — from banks, typically once federal limits are exhausted. Higher rates that may vary with the economy, interest accruing during school, and usually a co-signer.
  • Discharge — student loans are far harder to eliminate in bankruptcy than other debts. Some federal loans can be forgiven for people working in government, non-profits, or teaching.

Assign the readings — note the deliberate pairing of two opposing opinion pieces, due before Tuesday:

Tuesday
Data Analysis · Part Two

The Charts, and One Genuinely Surprising Result

Mindful moment (5 min), then the data:

  • Costs over time, shown in "2021 dollars" — meaning older figures have been adjusted upward for inflation. Ask which type of institution has risen most in percentage terms before revealing it.
  • Lifetime earnings by education level, reported "with controls" — the researchers used statistical methods to adjust for other differences between the groups, such as parental income and geography. Ask students what such controls can and cannot fix, and in what unmeasurable ways graduates might still differ from non-graduates.
  • Graduation rates by institution type. Two questions worth real time: do many first-year students expect not to graduate? And what explains the lower completion rates at for-profit colleges? Debt without a degree is the worst outcome in this topic, and this slide is where it appears.
  • The growth of student debt since 2004, set against credit card debt. The comparison is what makes the scale legible.
  • Repayment rates by institution type, and who holds the loans.
  • Median debt by major and degree, which lets students see which balances are realistically repayable and which are not.
The result that reframes the week: families in the top income groups carry higher average student loan balances than families further down the distribution. Ask why before explaining — graduate and professional degrees, more expensive institutions, and the fact that the poorest students often don't attend at all. It complicates "forgiveness helps the poor" considerably.
Wednesday
Formal Seminar

Transfer Payments, and Who Pays

Mindful moment (5 min), then the economic idea the deck says is critical to any debate about fairness.

When government directs money to a specific group, that's a transfer payment — the resources come from people who don't receive the benefit. Social Security transfers from the young to the old. Farm subsidies transfer from non-farmers to farmers.

Applied here: forgiving student debt is funded by people who don't hold student loans. That includes the wealthy — and also people who already paid their loans off, and the majority of Americans who never went to college. Forgiveness also gives up future federal revenue, which must be raised elsewhere or offset by spending cuts.

Then the discussion:

  • Why does government provide student loans at all? (The answer the deck wants: an educated workforce produces economic benefits for the whole country.) Who benefits, and where does the money come from?
  • If we cancelled some or all student debt, who would benefit most? Do people with student debt tend to earn more than people without it? Who would object, and on what grounds?
  • How has the need for a college education changed over time, alongside its cost?

Before students leave: themes, lingering questions, and one new resource for Thursday.

Thursday
Formal Seminar (cont'd)

Design the Policy Yourself

Mindful moment (5 min), resources shared, then the deck's best question, which converts an argument into a design problem:

If you were assigned the task of deciding whose debts should be reduced, how would you decide? What would be the fairest approach?

Push students toward specifics — by income, by balance, by degree completed, by institution type, by profession, by how long the debt has been held. Every criterion they propose has a defensible rationale and an obvious unfairness, which is the whole point.

Two further questions the deck raises for classes with the appetite:

  • Should college be free, as it is in some other high-income countries?
  • Does government assistance itself make it easier for colleges to keep raising prices? This is the sharpest economic question in the topic and it cuts against both partisan positions.
Friday
Reflection & Self-Evaluation

Score Your Participation

The four reflective questions, then the participation matrix. Students also use the participation rubric to score the week and explain the score.

02 / Facilitation

Notes for the Guide

The deck warns that this discussion can turn partisan and needs handling adroitly. The reliable defence is sequencing: spend Monday and Tuesday on facts nobody disputes, and only open the policy question once the room shares a factual base.

Build the Facts First

  • The deck is explicit that the loan landscape is hard to follow and worth real seminar time. Students who don't know that the government pays interest on a subsidised loan while you're enrolled cannot evaluate any proposal about them.
  • The gross-versus-net distinction defuses a lot of panic — published prices are not what most families pay.
  • Students should leave knowing that student debt is unusually hard to discharge in bankruptcy. It explains why this debt behaves differently from every other kind.

The Transfer Payment Frame

  • This is the deck's own central move, and it is genuinely non-partisan: all targeted government spending is a transfer from those who don't receive it.
  • The Social Security and farm subsidy examples matter — they establish that transfers are ordinary and often justified, rather than inherently suspect.
  • Applied to forgiveness, it names the constituencies that arguments usually skip: people who already repaid, and the majority of Americans who never enrolled.
  • It also cuts the other way. Once students accept that transfers can be justified, "someone else pays" stops being a knock-down objection and becomes a question about whether the benefit is worth it.

Where Discussion Tends to Go

  • The debt-without-a-degree case is where most students land as the hardest one, and rightly. Someone who borrowed, didn't finish, and has the debt without the earnings gets none of the benefit and all of the cost.
  • For-profit colleges deserve the time. Lower completion rates and worse repayment outcomes make the institution type, not just the borrower, part of the question.
  • "Just make college free" arrives early. Take it seriously — several wealthy countries do it — and then ask the follow-up about whether easy financing is part of why prices rose.
  • Keep both opinion pieces in play. They were assigned as a matched pair; if only one is getting cited, name that.

Adapting This Topic

  • Optional extensions: How Did the US Reach $1.6 Trillion in Student Debt? (USAFacts) and the interactive map of student debt by state — which works well live, since students can look up the states they're considering.
  • Pairing: the deck suggests running this alongside an "Is College Worth It?" seminar, noting that the first four graphs are shared between them.
  • Short week: keep Monday's mechanics and Wednesday's transfer-payment frame. The Thursday design exercise can shrink to fifteen minutes and still work.
  • Pairs well with: the test scores and American dream topics — all three ask whether education still delivers the mobility it promises.