Boomerang effect is not debt-driven

The rate at which young adults “boomerang” is increasing — recent studies report that between 20 and 50 percent are returning home.

But a new study also casts doubt on the notion that staggering student loans are driving young adults back to their parents’ doorsteps.

Two sociology professors found a strong association between college completion and the boomerang effect: Young adults who did not finish their degrees had at least a 40 percent higher risk of returning home than those who graduated, likely due to limited options in finding a job.

You’ve said your tearful goodbyes. You’ve watched the car pull out of the driveway, down the street and out of view. Your baby is gone.

But alas, two or three or four years later, he’s back, taking up residence in your newly finished basement, playing video games and eating Cheetos for who knows how long.

According to a new study, the reason for the prodigal’s return might not be the crushing college debt he has accumulated and his willingness to sponge for a few more years while he works to pay off his loans.

Sociology professors at Dartmouth College and Montana State University found that young people might be returning home because they never finished college and can’t find jobs.

In fact, the study, published last week in Sociology of Education and based on annual surveys of more than 5,000 people born between 1980 and 1984, found that so-called boomerangers actually had less student loan debt than young adults who didn’t return home.

Accumulating tens, or hundreds, of thousands of dollars in college loan debt is bad enough. Accumulating that kind of debt with nothing to show for it is much worse.

According to the National Student Clearinghouse, an education nonprofit, only 52.9 percent of students who enrolled in U.S. colleges and universities in the fall of 2009 completed school within six years.

Certainly, cost is an issue. College has never been more expensive. U.S. Department of Education data shows that over the past three decades, “Tuition at four-year colleges has more than doubled, even after adjusting for inflation.”

But there’s another problem: Colleges and universities are very focused on bringing students in, less so on turning them out with viable skills.

“America’s higher education system has focused almost exclusively on inputs— money for enrolling students —and too little on outcomes— what students get out of college,” according to the Department of Education.

In an article for Fortune magazine, Sheila Bair, president of Washington College, wrote, “We found that two strong predictors of attrition were financial need and a sense of social isolation. In other words, students struggling to cover tuition costs — sometimes with excessive borrowing —were more likely to drop out, as were students who felt detached and alone — those, for instance, who were not active in a club, sport, or academic group.”

Part of Bair’s answer to attrition was an increased focus on leadership training, support services, mentoring and internships to help students feel more a part of the community and more invested in their futures.

All of Lancaster County’s four-year colleges and universities have graduation rates above the national average, according to the Department of Education’s online research tool, collegescorecard.ed.gov. Millersville University, for example, has a graduation rate of 62 percent, while Franklin & Marshall boasts 87 percent.

There are dozens of other universities within a 90-minute drive of Lancaster city. We would hope those universities are taking an honest look at graduation rates.

If they’re good, they can always be better. If they’re not, administrators need to take inventory.

Students also need to be accountable.

If you’re going to borrow $100,000 for college, commit yourself to finishing, with a viable degree.

Otherwise, with no degree and a mountain of debt, whoever is paying the bill will surely feel the boomerang — right between the eyes.