One could afford college without the government, if it wasn't for the government.
The Cost of Higher Education
- Thread starter What Would Jesus Do?
- Start date
If you subsidize something, you will get more of it...thus higher demand and higher costs. You just created a market. Your solution will drive costs even higher.
I agree in particular with the bolded part. In a time in Iowa City where the County is going to raise the minimum wage because we have so many people living in poverty and so forth...I cannot fill certain positions that would pay more than $70K/year PLUS about another $20K/year in benefits.
There just aren't qualified, prepared candidates for a range of higher skill jobs and then when someone does have the background or training necessary...they can't pass a drug test or they have a DUI, or more, that prevents them from going to work.
I don't think anyone should be "forced" to go the trade school route v. the academic route, but many, many kids have no idea what options are even available to them and yet a good many schools "herd" kids toward a college prep track like that is the only viable option there is.
We need to rebalance how kids are being advised and mentored while in Jr. and Sr. High.
Two things. Eliminate the drug tests as they are worthless (and easily beaten).
Second, many have talents that are ideal for trade schools and can likely earn a very good living going that route. Go learn to be a diesel mechanic if it fits, rather than bouncing through average, thankless office style jobs. There's no shame in mastering a trade and commanding a decent salary doing it.
FYI, the drug tests are brought to bear because customers demand it as a condition of working in their facilities. And they demand it because their insurance companies require it. And their insurance companies require it because some doofus somewhere drove a dump truck over someone while high on crack or whatever. (Or "fill in the blank" with any accident anywhere where an insurance claim was paid as a result of some idiot on drugs while at work, etc.)
I cannot speak to the why. The program is Iowa Tuition Grant funding, given to private universities and colleges on a per student basis.
https://www.iowacollegeaid.gov/content/iowa-tuition-grant
So I get the rankings thing though, especially since one of the big things driving the tailgating crackdown was because it hurts our academic rankings which in turn can impact employers recruiting. I know this is the case for my company (consulting) since we have refocused our recruiting on "name" schools. Granted its probably more severe for consulting since you're constantly selling your people to potential clients but the more we slide in the rankings the worse it will get for job seekers.
As for the cost side the buildings and amenities compared to the 70's has to be a huge cost. Think about AC, internet, gyms, more space per student and it all adds up. Would love to get a ballpark of how much this has added. Have you guys seen the new dorm on campus? Its nuts!
I sit on the advisory board for one of the departments and its very interesting. Specifically some of the admin functions and the interactions between them, the department and students with a lot of finger pointing in all directions. Another is just the amount of time it takes to implement change within the department. It is easy to forget that these professors are teaching classes, mentoring upperclassmen / grad students, doing research and also trying to get money for all of those items.
All that being said the way that we allocate positions, which also impacts tenure, needs revamped. There are departments that have much larger staff but without the enrollment to match because 20 years ago they had the enrollment.
Additionally the departments that are growing don't necessarily have a direct tie in to jobs but continue to recruit as if they will. There is no cohesive strategy for why a department is growing other than students are coming in to the major. Back to the point about advising and technical school I think it also applies to majors. We can't put it all on the students as "Buyer Beware, jobs in this field may be tough to find" If I honestly look back at my undergrad I probably would have taken a different major, all of the faculty I had was great and taught me a lot but I really only use a portion of what I learned in my major classes
That is not going to happen. That is like when people were buying homes in the early 2000's and thinking that a home was going to increase at 9% YOY. The problem is that your $250,000 house isn't going to be worth half a million in 8 years. There is a massive bubble in higher education that will pop like any bubble. Without major wage increases people will not sign up for$400,000 dollars to make $50,000 out of school.
I agree with this but the problem is that kids are being taught and advised by people with 4 year degrees or more. So there is a bias that slips in there and culturally college degrees have more prestige then the skilled trades. It's silly but that's reality. It's a lot to overcome to re-balance things.
We really have to get past the "talking down" of trades and vocational ed. It's not a path for the "dumb" kids. First, it really never was, but second, today's world is all electronics. Electronics break and they need to be fixed. It can be a really lucrative path and then if someone progresses to a point where they need a 4-year degree, they can always go back for it, maybe even at their employer's expense.
I think Elizabeth Warren should go after "big education" like she goes after "big corporations" I mean what's the difference really. Higher Ed has been ripping off the public for years based on how high and fast the costs have risen. Then you have those evil corporate bosses making all that money. Well Lizzy, how about all those tenured professors that can never be fired and some earn millions each year.
One other thing Lizzy, where do you think all these high paid CEO's went to college? Do you criticize all the grads of the Harvard Business School for making millions? Now go sit in your tee-pee and think about that!
One other thing Lizzy, where do you think all these high paid CEO's went to college? Do you criticize all the grads of the Harvard Business School for making millions? Now go sit in your tee-pee and think about that!
While there's some truth to that, it can also work the other way. Again and again we see sectors subsidized with the net result that the market expands (for the reason you mentioned) and that market expansion creates economies of scale that drive prices down and choices up.
I would say that the problem here is not that we are subsidizing education, but that we have done it in a way that has not fostered - and may have stifled - competition.
That problem, I would suggest, may be due to lack of accountability. If you buy most other products you expect a serviceable, working product. There's a guarantee, a warranty, or a warrant of merchantability - something along those lines. But all you get from schools is some sort certificate of completion - a diploma, a degree, whatever, sometimes with accolades.
But what is that piece of paper worth? Does it get you a job, an income, make you a fit member of society? Does it even equip you to vote or balance your checkbook?
That can happen, but the availability of cheap loan money and the mindset that the investment always pays off has left universities to compete on facilities, programs and faculty and really not on price. At some point, something's going to give and that's going to start to matter.
It's the research being done at the Universities. Which often brings a lot of value to the state.
I'm at a University that is looking to replace about 1/2 of it's current tenured faculty in the next 7-10 years due to retirement, so it's working hard to raise funds to attract top faculty to replace them. It's been estimated that it will cost about $1m-$2m per research faculty to attract them and setup their labs/research.
At a Community College you are typically just paying them to teach, and a lot of the courses are not taught by faculty. Adjunct instructors, even with a PhD, might be making only $1-$2k per course over an entire semester.
What The White House Wants Every Family To Know About College
Most of the alumni of more than half of the nation's colleges and universities fail to outearn a typical high school graduate six years after enrolling, according to new data from the Department of Education.
The figure, gleaned from a federal analysis of former undergraduate students' tax records, is among the new information the Obama administration made public Saturday as part of an effort to end the era of opacity that has marked the U.S. higher education experience.
For generations, American families have sent their children to college in the hope that, after years of study and thousands of dollars in costs, a degree would ultimately be worth it. Now they'll be armed with evidence, some of it available for the first time, such as typical earnings for former students of their chosen college and whether they're making progress in paying off their student debt.
The launch of a new government website housing former students' debt levels and annual earnings for every college in the U.S. that accepts federal student aid comes as some policymakers and higher-education experts increasingly question the value of certain schools and degrees. More than 40 million Americans collectively owe nearly $1.3 trillion on their student loans, and while former students are left to suffer the consequences of dubious credentials and record debt burdens, colleges often get away scot-free.
"As college costs and student debt keep rising, the choices that Americans make when searching for and selecting a college have never been more important," President Barack Obama said in his weekly address. "That’s why everyone should be able to find clear, reliable, open data on college affordability and value."
The White House is betting that by arming households with new information about how students from certain schools fare during and after college, it will transform a sector that has largely escaped accountability for jacking up tuition or larding students with unaffordable debts that ultimately are backstopped by taxpayers.
"Many of the incentives in higher education do little to promote an affordable, high-quality education -- and often even work against promoting affordability," according to an Education Department report.
The administration's college ratings project was driven in part by "the concern that too many students have their futures shortchanged because they attend schools that do not serve them well -- either because the institution doesn’t get the student to graduation, or because the student completes the course of study but finds their credential or degree is not valued in the labor market -- and then are left saddled with debt but with few opportunities," according to the Education Department.
In fact, the department noted, "at some schools, the data suggest that students cannot expect that a college certificate or degree will create an earnings premium" relative to what a typical high school graduate earns.
In recent years, the gap in annual earnings between college graduates and high school graduates has widened not because college degree holders are earning more, but rather because high school graduates are earning less.
That has prompted a debate in Washington over whether college is always worth the cost. The Education Department wants students and their families to evaluate schools in part based on whether the cost of attendance, including possible student debt, is worth the investment.
"There are colleges dedicated to helping students of all backgrounds learn without saddling them with debt. We should hold everybody to that standard," Obama said. "Our economic future depends on it."
Most of the alumni of more than half of the nation's colleges and universities fail to outearn a typical high school graduate six years after enrolling, according to new data from the Department of Education.
The figure, gleaned from a federal analysis of former undergraduate students' tax records, is among the new information the Obama administration made public Saturday as part of an effort to end the era of opacity that has marked the U.S. higher education experience.
For generations, American families have sent their children to college in the hope that, after years of study and thousands of dollars in costs, a degree would ultimately be worth it. Now they'll be armed with evidence, some of it available for the first time, such as typical earnings for former students of their chosen college and whether they're making progress in paying off their student debt.
The launch of a new government website housing former students' debt levels and annual earnings for every college in the U.S. that accepts federal student aid comes as some policymakers and higher-education experts increasingly question the value of certain schools and degrees. More than 40 million Americans collectively owe nearly $1.3 trillion on their student loans, and while former students are left to suffer the consequences of dubious credentials and record debt burdens, colleges often get away scot-free.
"As college costs and student debt keep rising, the choices that Americans make when searching for and selecting a college have never been more important," President Barack Obama said in his weekly address. "That’s why everyone should be able to find clear, reliable, open data on college affordability and value."
The White House is betting that by arming households with new information about how students from certain schools fare during and after college, it will transform a sector that has largely escaped accountability for jacking up tuition or larding students with unaffordable debts that ultimately are backstopped by taxpayers.
"Many of the incentives in higher education do little to promote an affordable, high-quality education -- and often even work against promoting affordability," according to an Education Department report.
The administration's college ratings project was driven in part by "the concern that too many students have their futures shortchanged because they attend schools that do not serve them well -- either because the institution doesn’t get the student to graduation, or because the student completes the course of study but finds their credential or degree is not valued in the labor market -- and then are left saddled with debt but with few opportunities," according to the Education Department.
In fact, the department noted, "at some schools, the data suggest that students cannot expect that a college certificate or degree will create an earnings premium" relative to what a typical high school graduate earns.
In recent years, the gap in annual earnings between college graduates and high school graduates has widened not because college degree holders are earning more, but rather because high school graduates are earning less.
That has prompted a debate in Washington over whether college is always worth the cost. The Education Department wants students and their families to evaluate schools in part based on whether the cost of attendance, including possible student debt, is worth the investment.
"There are colleges dedicated to helping students of all backgrounds learn without saddling them with debt. We should hold everybody to that standard," Obama said. "Our economic future depends on it."
