College Has Gotten 12 Times More Expensive in One Generation

[AthenaAwakened]

As bright-eyed college freshmen arrive on campus, they can look forward to accruing knowledge, independence, lifelong friendships—and serious bills. In the 2012-13 school year, first-year, on-campus tuition averaged $43,000 at four-year, private schools and $21,700 at in-state public schools.

It wasn't always like this: The cost of undergraduate education is 12 times higher than it was 35 years ago, far outpacing inflation. While the indexed price of college tuition and fees skyrocketed by more than 1,122 percent since 1978, the cost of medical care rose less than 600 percent, and the cost of housing and food went up less than 300.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/college-tuition-increased-1100-percent-since-1978

It must be that never ending pursuit of profit that is driving up these costs to such absurd levels...

Why must A REASON be the ONLY REASON?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Researchers found that the money public colleges collect in tuition surpassed the money they receive from state funding in 2012. Tuition accounted for 25 percent of school revenue, up from 17 percent in 2003. State funding, meanwhile, plummeted from 32 percent to 23 percent during the same period. That’s a far cry from the 1970s, when state governments supplied public colleges with nearly 75 percent of their funding, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...niversity-tuition-now-than-state-governments/

 

[Trausti]

The disproportionate increase in the number of university staffers who neither teach nor conduct research has continued unabated in more recent years, and slowed only slightly since the start of the economic downturn, during which time colleges and universities have contended that a dearth of resources forced them to sharply raise tuition.

In all, from 1987 until 2011-12—the most recent academic year for which comparable figures are available—universities and colleges collectively added 517,636 administrators and professional employees, or an average of 87 every working day, according to the analysis of federal figures, by the New England Center of Investigative Reporting in collaboration with the nonprofit, nonpartisan social-science research group the American Institutes for Research.

“There’s just a mind-boggling amount of money per student that’s being spent on administration,” said Andrew Gillen, a senior researcher at the institutes. “It raises a question of priorities.”

http://necir.org/2014/02/06/new-analysis-shows-problematic-boom-in-higher-ed-administrators/

Priorities? We don't need your stinking priorities. We like sinecures for the assistant to the associate vice-president for the provost of this or that feel good title. Quit complaining. The more the government throws at education through funding or student loans, the more the universities can charge and grow. It's wonderful!

 

[Axulus]

Since 1990, college enrollment increased from 11.8 million to 17.5 million. That is an increase of about 50%.

I'm certain that statistic isn't relevant because it wasn't raised, only a strawman.

Actually it demonstrates that the problem is even worse. Must businesses can decrease their cost per customer as the number of customers increases. Economies of scale and all that.

Colleges apparently have extreme diseconomies of scale.

 

[ksen]

Researchers found that the money public colleges collect in tuition surpassed the money they receive from state funding in 2012. Tuition accounted for 25 percent of school revenue, up from 17 percent in 2003. State funding, meanwhile, plummeted from 32 percent to 23 percent during the same period. That’s a far cry from the 1970s, when state governments supplied public colleges with nearly 75 percent of their funding, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...niversity-tuition-now-than-state-governments/

Makes me wonder at how low public funding can go before public universities really shouldn't be called "public" anymore.

 

[Axulus]

Researchers found that the money public colleges collect in tuition surpassed the money they receive from state funding in 2012. Tuition accounted for 25 percent of school revenue, up from 17 percent in 2003. State funding, meanwhile, plummeted from 32 percent to 23 percent during the same period. That’s a far cry from the 1970s, when state governments supplied public colleges with nearly 75 percent of their funding, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...niversity-tuition-now-than-state-governments/

Had college tuition costs merely increased at the rate of inflation since the 1970s, current government funding amounts would cover 150% of the cost.

 

[Axulus]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...niversity-tuition-now-than-state-governments/

Makes me wonder at how low public funding can go before public universities really shouldn't be called "public" anymore.

What you should really be wondering is at what point colleges will start decreasing their prices and their spending.

Is there some reason why you believe unlimited funding would not simply be matched with increased spending?

- - - Updated - - -

The disproportionate increase in the number of university staffers who neither teach nor conduct research has continued unabated in more recent years, and slowed only slightly since the start of the economic downturn, during which time colleges and universities have contended that a dearth of resources forced them to sharply raise tuition.

In all, from 1987 until 2011-12—the most recent academic year for which comparable figures are available—universities and colleges collectively added 517,636 administrators and professional employees, or an average of 87 every working day, according to the analysis of federal figures, by the New England Center of Investigative Reporting in collaboration with the nonprofit, nonpartisan social-science research group the American Institutes for Research.

“There’s just a mind-boggling amount of money per student that’s being spent on administration,” said Andrew Gillen, a senior researcher at the institutes. “It raises a question of priorities.”

http://necir.org/2014/02/06/new-analysis-shows-problematic-boom-in-higher-ed-administrators/

Priorities? We don't need your stinking priorities. We like sinecures for the assistant to the associate vice-president for the provost of this or that feel good title. Quit complaining. The more the government throws at education through funding or student loans, the more the universities can charge and grow. It's wonderful!

The solution is to double government funding so that they can hire 517,636 more administrators. I'm sure that will make college more affordable for the students...somehow.

 

[Trausti]

The solution is to double government funding so that they can hire 517,636 more administrators. I'm sure that will make college more affordable for the students...somehow.

Perhaps we can take a page from those who criticize employer concerned over increases in the minimum wage. Hey, if you can't provide a quality education without making a student go into debt, maybe you shouldn't be in the education industry.

 

[Trausti]

At Minnesota, tuition and fees for state residents have more than doubled in a decade, to $13,524. That far exceeds the average at four-year public colleges of $8,655, which also represents a doubling, according to the College Board. Private-college tuition averages $29,056, but has risen more slowly.

For students, the effect is striking. In 1975, a University of Minnesota undergraduate could cover tuition by working six hours a week year-round at a minimum-wage job, the Journal calculated. Today, a student would have to work 32 hours at minimum wage to cover the cost.

Gregory Kiss, a sophomore business major, expects to graduate owing more than $30,000. Trying to economize, he bought a dining plan that provides only 10 meals a week.

Well, I'm sure there's a good reason for the high cost.

The bureaucracy finds numerous ways to spend money. Officials have spent millions planning a not-yet-built residential community 20 miles from the University of Minnesota Twin Cities campus designed in part to showcase sustainable energy and environmental stewardship.

Administrative employees make up an increasing share of the university's higher-paid people. The school employs 353 people earning more than $200,000 a year. That is up 57% from the inflation-adjusted pay equivalent in 2001. Among this $200,000-plus group, 81 today have administrative titles, versus 39 in 2001.

Administrators making over $300,000 in inflation-adjusted terms rose to 17 from seven.

Maybe not.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323316804578161490716042814

 

[Axulus]

Well, I'm sure there's a good reason for the high cost.

The bureaucracy finds numerous ways to spend money. Officials have spent millions planning a not-yet-built residential community 20 miles from the University of Minnesota Twin Cities campus designed in part to showcase sustainable energy and environmental stewardship.

Administrative employees make up an increasing share of the university's higher-paid people. The school employs 353 people earning more than $200,000 a year. That is up 57% from the inflation-adjusted pay equivalent in 2001. Among this $200,000-plus group, 81 today have administrative titles, versus 39 in 2001.

Administrators making over $300,000 in inflation-adjusted terms rose to 17 from seven.

Maybe not.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887323316804578161490716042814

How dare you criticize those administrator salaries while remaining silent about CEO pay! Those noble administrators are talking a pay cut when they could be earning millions more as a private company CEO!

 

[laughing dog]

Since 1990, college enrollment increased from 11.8 million to 17.5 million. That is an increase of about 50%.

I'm certain that statistic isn't relevant because it wasn't raised, only a strawman.

Actually it demonstrates that the problem is even worse. Must businesses can decrease their cost per customer as the number of customers increases. Economies of scale and all that.

Colleges apparently have extreme diseconomies of scale.

Do you have any data that shows that holding all other outside factors constant (like regulation), that most businesses can accommodate a doubling of customers and decrease their per unit cost per customer? I'd especially be interested in data from the service industry.

 

[laughing dog]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...niversity-tuition-now-than-state-governments/

Makes me wonder at how low public funding can go before public universities really shouldn't be called "public" anymore.

We have stopped saying that we are "state supported" to saying we are "state assisted".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Since 1990, college enrollment increased from 11.8 million to 17.5 million. That is an increase of about 50%.

I'm certain that statistic isn't relevant because it wasn't raised, only a strawman.

Actually it demonstrates that the problem is even worse. Must businesses can decrease their cost per customer as the number of customers increases. Economies of scale and all that.

Colleges apparently have extreme diseconomies of scale.

Are you suggesting that constructing buildings and hiring teachers can be done in bulk?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Makes me wonder at how low public funding can go before public universities really shouldn't be called "public" anymore.

What you should really be wondering is at what point colleges will start decreasing their prices and their spending.

Is there some reason why you believe unlimited funding would not simply be matched with increased spending?

The State could make funding contingent on such things.

 

[Axulus]

Actually it demonstrates that the problem is even worse. Must businesses can decrease their cost per customer as the number of customers increases. Economies of scale and all that.

Colleges apparently have extreme diseconomies of scale.

Are you suggesting that constructing buildings and hiring teachers can be done in bulk?

I'm suggesting that colleges have costs that should be able scale up (one would presume) with more students, at a lower average cost, such as creating their online system for class registration, their website, their admissions screening process, their introductory level average class size (larger colleges have 300-400+ students in their introductory level classes), among other things.

Yet for some reason their costs have gone up about 4x the rate of inflation since the 1970's on a per student basis.

 

[Axulus]

What you should really be wondering is at what point colleges will start decreasing their prices and their spending.

Is there some reason why you believe unlimited funding would not simply be matched with increased spending?

The State could make funding contingent on such things.

What's stopping it from currently making such contingencies?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Are you suggesting that constructing buildings and hiring teachers can be done in bulk?

I'm suggesting that colleges have costs that should be able scale up (one would presume) with more students, at a lower average cost, such as creating their online system for class registration, their website, their admissions screening process, their introductory level average class size (larger colleges have 300-400+ students in their introductory level classes), among other things.

Yet for some reason their costs have gone up about 4x the rate of inflation since the 1970's on a per student basis.

Is this another one of your "I really haven't thought this one through and am just going to complain" threads without actually demonstrating much other than a cost increase?

 

[ksen]

Makes me wonder at how low public funding can go before public universities really shouldn't be called "public" anymore.

What you should really be wondering is at what point colleges will start decreasing their prices and their spending.

Is that what I really should be wondering? How has college spending been doing over that same time period that tuition to students has been skyrocketing?

Is there some reason why you believe unlimited funding would not simply be matched with increased spending?

Maybe because historically more government funding has resulted in lower tuition costs to students? Why would that change? And if it was in danger of changing why can't government put strings on their continued funding with progress in lowering student tuition costs?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The State could make funding contingent on such things.

What's stopping it from currently making such contingencies?

The increased funding part probably.

 

[Axulus]

I'm suggesting that colleges have costs that should be able scale up (one would presume) with more students, at a lower average cost, such as creating their online system for class registration, their website, their admissions screening process, their introductory level average class size (larger colleges have 300-400+ students in their introductory level classes), among other things.

Yet for some reason their costs have gone up about 4x the rate of inflation since the 1970's on a per student basis.

Is this another one of your "I really haven't thought this one through and am just going to complain" threads without actually demonstrating much other than a cost increase?

What is there to demonstrate? You provide the evidence that they can't scale up since you are the one proclaiming that they can't, not me.

Please also include in your analysis how a 50% increase in the student body requires a far higher percent of their budgets be spent on administration, fancy rec centers, expensive modernist architecture on new buildings, satellite projects 20 miles away to demonstrate how environmentally innovative they are, among other things.