Via Meadia has nothing in principle against government aid for tuition, particularly when it is given to highly talented students from modest backgrounds, for whom college would otherwise be far out of reach. But when well over half of all students depend on federal aid to attend college, it’s clear that something is out of whack. Making federal aid so abundant that it becomes the norm takes much of the pressure off colleges to reform themselves, and allows them to continue raising prices. Unless colleges are forced to compete for students on price, they will continue to use tuition dollars to fund lavish construction projects and administrative salaries rather than cutting costs.From what we've seen in our recent looks at colleges, construction projects are abundant. I don't see any evidence of cost-cutting, either. The day of reckoning is coming, but it's not here yet.
As things stand now, federal student aid policies seem to be more bent on funneling cash to colleges than on helping students.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Home Truth
Walter Russell Mead:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
My daughter's campus renovated two bathrooms this year. We didn't pass the cost on to her, though. We'll take it up with her after she completes her BA this November and we establish an Alumni Association.
Worse than the overall percentage of kids getting aid, IMO, is the percentage of aid-takers who will graduate (only 40% vs. well over 60% for those who do not take aid), versus the proportion who get student loans but no degree, or worst yet, bigger student loans and a worthless degree.
If you did the criteria right, you could cut student loans and grants by 60% without depriving the economy of a single college graduate. Hmmmmm....
And those weighted down by unpayable student loan debt (graduates or not) are not out buying houses (living at home), cars, washers and dryers or cellphones (well, actually EVERYONE somehow seems to be able to afford a cellphone). The money, if it's being paid back at all, is at best being "redistributed" back into the economy by the government, and we know how efficient that is.
Part of the problem (only part) is that while plenty of people can look at the big picture and say, "gosh, maybe not everyone is best served by going to college," substantially fewer middle and upper class Americans are willing to say, "gosh, maybe MY kid isn't best served by going to college."
And not without reason... stories of billionaire dropouts aside, a four year degree is almost universally considered an entry level requirement. For anything.
I don't know how you fix that. And while you might think universities gobble up a lot of money (and they do) they are also the economic engines of an awful lot of communities.
Brian makes a good point, and probably the best start on convincing families is to require colleges accepting federal financial aid to provide an estimate to incoming students of their likelihood of graduation, and of being able to pay back their student loans.
I'm guessing that at least some of the third of incoming college students in MN requiring remedial classes--and who have an overall graduation rate of 17% or so--would realize "maybe I'm better off as a plumber or auto mechanic."
And, since yes, about a third to half of incoming students really don't belong in college--see the six year gradation rates--there would be Hell to pay, especially in the less selective schools. And it would be a good thing.
Part of the problem (only part) is that while plenty of people can look at the big picture and say, "gosh, maybe not everyone is best served by going to college," substantially fewer middle and upper class Americans are willing to say, "gosh, maybe MY kid isn't best served by going to college."
Right. The problem, as far as I can tell, isn't really with the professoriate. It's administrative bloat. And that we've seen a 25-year trend in which colleges are turning themselves into country clubs. I was astonished at all the construction going on at my alma mater. It was actually a little run down and Spartan during my college years. Not so much any more.
And while you might think universities gobble up a lot of money (and they do) they are also the economic engines of an awful lot of communities.
Yes, including some of the communities that house colleges my son is currently considering.
Administrative bloat doesn't explain it all. Compare the size, for example, of athletic facilities vs. administrative. There is no adminstrative building in the nation that even comes close to the size of the average basketball or hockey arena on campus, let alone the football stadiums.
Also take a look at the difference between buildings built in WWII and before with those built in the 1980s and later. Lots more space and amenities in the new ones. Add to that the fact that where the MA or MS often got you a professorate back in the day, now it requires a Ph.D. That all costs money....
Post a Comment