> But HN is regularly bombarded with articles about college and university being a over-valued investment.

Would you go to a doctor who skipped a college? Do you want to drive over a bridge designed by a bunch of hipster dropouts? If not, then the higher education is still relevant, and all the hipsters must just shut up.

> But how can you chain that in the same sentence to a right to be entertained ?

I'm quoting one of the student complaints - that a lecturer is not "entertaining enough", and this is not "what they paid their money for".

EDIT: and yes, it's not the students who changed recently, it's the creeping commercialisation of the education system in general. Students are "consumers" now, and this is a new thing indeed. They should not be blamed for such an attitude, of course.