Now that many Americans have figured out that college degrees are not necessarily the golden tickets to prosperity they have been sold as, people are turning more and more to training programs that lead to occupational credentials. That’s good.

But not all of those programs appear to be worthwhile either, as Sherman Criner points out in today’s Martin Center article.

He writes:

A new report from AEI and the Burning Glass Institute offers a data-rich yet sobering diagnosis of modern credentialism. As Americans have sought faster, cheaper alternatives to traditional college degrees, policymakers have embraced short-term workforce programs, such as Career and Technical Education (CTE) initiatives, as a potential cure for student debt, underemployment, and an aimless public-education system. “Holding New Credentials Accountable for Outcomes” warns that, amid this credentials boom, the public risks spending billions on programs that promise economic uplift but deliver little more than slips of paper.

Is this a public policy problem? Do we need government officials to decide which of the credential programs can stay (and perhaps even receive subsidies) and which must go?

Criner suggests that government should evaluate credential programs to find out which ones deserve support and which ones don’t, but I think it might be better if the government did not meddle in this market at all. Over time, people will find out which credentials are useful and which ones aren’t.