Just because we all know that doesn't make it so--school budgets have increased only slightly over inflation. The big difference is how much of that comes from the students rather than the government.
-
Features
US student loans grotesquely high
- Thread starter lpetrich
- Start date
Just because we all know that doesn't make it so--school budgets have increased only slightly over inflation. The big difference is how much of that comes from the students rather than the government.
ronburgundy
Contributor
Relevant to the discussion is the fact that while the rise in student loans is usually blamed on rising cost of education itself, much of it is not a rise in actual education costs (and almost none is due to a rise in faculty pay), but rather b/c most states have slashed their per student funding to colleges, shifting most of the cost from tax funded appropriations to tuition. In just the past decade states cut per student funding by and average of 16%, and the prior decade was similar. So, colleges lost 1/3 of their state funding since the the late 90's. Given that tuition was only about 25% of the cost, shifting that 1/3 to tuition would more than double tuition in that period.
Surveys show that most Americans (60% of Dems and 80% of Republicans) wrongly believe that state funding for colleges has increased or stayed the same.
Plus, a larger % of student loans today are going towards non-tuition expenses. More students today choose to live off campus, and the cost of housing (even after adjusting for inflation) has risen more than 50% since the 90's, with average student room and board now costing more than average tuition. Part that is b/c increased enrollments increase demand for student housing, and part is b/c student preferences have led to housing that is large, with fewer students willing to sharing a room or even share a bathroom. On campus housing costs more too. While a higher % of students are living off campus, the growth in enrollment is even greater, so colleges have to pay for the skyrocketing (and inflation exceeding) costs of new construction, which gets passed onto what students are charged to live in the dorms.
In addition, students having kids during college has increased 30% in just the past 15 years. Also, since the 90's students have (wisely) shifted much of the debt from credit cards to loans, due partly schools educated students better about the dangers of credit card debt and banning credit card marketers from campus (I recall my own school doing this about 15 years ago).
Surveys show that most Americans (60% of Dems and 80% of Republicans) wrongly believe that state funding for colleges has increased or stayed the same.
Plus, a larger % of student loans today are going towards non-tuition expenses. More students today choose to live off campus, and the cost of housing (even after adjusting for inflation) has risen more than 50% since the 90's, with average student room and board now costing more than average tuition. Part that is b/c increased enrollments increase demand for student housing, and part is b/c student preferences have led to housing that is large, with fewer students willing to sharing a room or even share a bathroom. On campus housing costs more too. While a higher % of students are living off campus, the growth in enrollment is even greater, so colleges have to pay for the skyrocketing (and inflation exceeding) costs of new construction, which gets passed onto what students are charged to live in the dorms.
In addition, students having kids during college has increased 30% in just the past 15 years. Also, since the 90's students have (wisely) shifted much of the debt from credit cards to loans, due partly schools educated students better about the dangers of credit card debt and banning credit card marketers from campus (I recall my own school doing this about 15 years ago).
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,297
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
People really don't realize that government support for education has disappeared? An embarassing statistic if true. School funding is all a matter of public record, it's not hard look this up and see how funding has frozen and costs increased in almost all districts in our nation.
The issue of other costs than tuition is also very much worth raising. When I was a student, it was not unusual to meet a fellow student who wasn't working while they were in school, or just had one part-time. Now, it is very unusual to meet a student who doesn't have at least one job, and most are either working full time or working more than one job.
The issue of other costs than tuition is also very much worth raising. When I was a student, it was not unusual to meet a fellow student who wasn't working while they were in school, or just had one part-time. Now, it is very unusual to meet a student who doesn't have at least one job, and most are either working full time or working more than one job.
steve_bank
Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
I heard recently that Purdue or Rutgers has capped tuition at $9k for a while.
Like many institution the more money many colleges make the more they spend.
Whether a student fails, drops out, or graduates the colleges profit. That is what large student loans underwrite.
Like many institution the more money many colleges make the more they spend.
Whether a student fails, drops out, or graduates the colleges profit. That is what large student loans underwrite.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,297
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
What non-private college "profits"? We all run in the red these days, and even if we don't, we're obliged to somehow spend whatever apportionment we receive somehow or other, that is an inherent component of the mandate of a state school. You say that "the more they make, the more they spend" as though that is a bad thing, rather than a literal description of how any non-profit organization works, by definition.
And your statement is false anyway, since both course and program completion are factored in to the amount of apportionment a college receives. At many schools, students can be reimbursed for tuition as well, provided they drop the course early in the term.
ronburgundy
Contributor
The first link in my post shows the data near the end. In fact, even 65% of college grads do not realize government funding has been cut over the past decade, and they are the one's paying more tuition as a direct result.
The fact that people who support education funding (Dems) and those directly harmed by reduced funding (college students) don't know that funding has been cut really shows how much better conservatives are at propagandizing and controlling the public narrative.
The University of Michigan spends over $10M on diversicrats. Many other universities probably do the same or more. Cut the fat and virtue signaling and save $$$.
ronburgundy
Contributor
U of M annual tuition increases for the last 60 years correlates near perfectly with the corresponding reduction in the percentage of funds they get from the state. In 1960, state appropriations covered 78% of the budget down to 14% now. Meanwhile tuition covered 20% of the budget in 1960 up to 73% now.
Like most Universities, their per student appropriations from the state has been slashed for decades. If U of M's state appropriation merely increased at the rate of inflation by the CPI since 2003, their current budget would be 50% higher than it is today.
Michigan cut appropriation to it's public colleges by 200 million this year.
We have an awful lot of people yammering on about bloated administration being the cause. It's a good distraction from the real issue.
Politesse
Lux Aeterna
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2018
- Messages
- 12,297
- Location
- Chochenyo Territory, US
- Gender
- nonbinary
- Basic Beliefs
- Jedi Wayseeker
I do see this as a fair criticism; administrative bloat is also a reality. While it is true that the rough proportion of administrative vs. classified vs. faculty pay has stayed within a similar margin at a lot of schools over the decades, I think it would be fair to ask whether we need administration to remain a similar proportion of staff and payroll as schools and their budgets expand considerably over time. This is often by design; I know from my own experience that the union representing the administration demands "parity" whenever the facutly get an increase in pay, new hires, or benefits, resulting in increasingly disproportionate wealth concentrating within their faction despite not doing any more or differerent labor to justify this.
And there have been much more clearcut cases of corruption, such as the 28% increase in administrative spending that the University of California saw during 2012-2016, the very period of time that the system was bragging about having recovered their pre-recession financial position, depsite a dearth of obvious improvement in life situation for chronically exploited faculty and student workers.
But I agree that this is often used as a spoil for questioning other aspects of higher education and finance.
So then why are they wasting so much money on diversicrats?
barbos
Contributor
Government does not make money magically appear, they have to take money from people one way or another.
Data clearly shows that number percentage of people who actually do the teaching constantly decreases.
barbos
Contributor
I don't think it did. It just stayed the same, but since Universities keep cranking up tuition costs government share became smaller. Don't blame the government. Blame Big Edu.
Right. If it really was a problem with government funding, the universities would be leaner and more efficient. Nope.
Derec
Contributor
Who said anything about forcing anybody to study for and pursue and degree in any particular major?
But at the same time, there is no need for society to subsidize an overinflated number of graduates easy programs like English, poetry, art history etc. Especially when people choosing those majors think they are too good to sully themselves with going to a State U and instead rack up six figures at some boutique private liberal arts college and then expect their huge student loan to be forgiven by Uncle Joe.
Professors in Poverty
That thread was all about PhDs in low-rigor fields like English have a hard time finding well-paying jobs in their field due to gross oversupply of those degrees. Instead, they end up adjunct professoring for peanuts.
laughing dog
Contributor
The "rigor" of a field of study depends on the faculty in that discipline at that institution, not the discipline.
The concept of "leaner" and "more efficient" in education depends on the aims of education.
The concept of "leaner" and "more efficient" in education depends on the aims of education.
Derec
Contributor
Of course it depends on discipline. Physics or Electrical Engineering is much more rigorous and also harder than English or Art History.
Huh?
laughing dog
Contributor
Rigor simply means intellectually challenging. A study of any discipline is as challenging as the teachers make it.
Apparently following a thread written in English is too rigorous for some people.
Derec
Contributor
It can mean that. It can also mean how exacting a discipline is. Natural science is inherently more rigorous than more subjective fields such as humanities.
I agree that quality of the teaching and the academic standards matter. Nevertheless, there are limits placed by the actual fields of study.
Your statement was lexically and syntactically correct English and I understood it. My befuddlement was not the result of lack of understanding, but because it was a complete non sequitur relative to what I wrote.
Bomb#20
Contributor
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2004
- Messages
- 8,237
- Location
- California
- Gender
- It's a free country.
- Basic Beliefs
- Rationalism
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/rigor
rigor
[ rig-er ]SHOW IPA
See synonyms for rigor on Thesaurus.com
noun
1 strictness, severity, or harshness, as in dealing with people.
2 the full or extreme severity of laws, rules, etc.
3 severity of living conditions; hardship; austerity:
the rigor of wartime existence.
4 a severe or harsh act, circumstance, etc.
5 scrupulous or inflexible accuracy or adherence:
the logical rigor of mathematics.
6 severity of weather or climate or an instance of this:
the rigors of winter.
7 Pathology. a sudden coldness, as that preceding certain fevers; chill.
8 Physiology. a state of rigidity in muscle tissues during which they are unable to respond to stimuli due to the coagulation of muscle protein.
9 Obsolete. stiffness or rigidity.
[ rig-er ]SHOW IPA
See synonyms for rigor on Thesaurus.com
noun
1 strictness, severity, or harshness, as in dealing with people.
2 the full or extreme severity of laws, rules, etc.
3 severity of living conditions; hardship; austerity:
the rigor of wartime existence.
4 a severe or harsh act, circumstance, etc.
5 scrupulous or inflexible accuracy or adherence:
the logical rigor of mathematics.
6 severity of weather or climate or an instance of this:
the rigors of winter.
7 Pathology. a sudden coldness, as that preceding certain fevers; chill.
8 Physiology. a state of rigidity in muscle tissues during which they are unable to respond to stimuli due to the coagulation of muscle protein.
9 Obsolete. stiffness or rigidity.
If by "rigor" you simply mean "intellectually challenging", then Biblical apologetics must be among the most rigorous of fields -- the more indefensible the passage, the more rigorous the apologetics.