Published: Sunday, Jan. 8 2012 11:00 p.m. MST
BYU-Idaho may be the model to follow-----don't put faculty and administration at
the center of the universe----let the students shine------grow the school and at
the same time, do the impossible---cut costs. All other models will fail;
I've heard someone say the current university as we know it today, will not
exist in 2020. And that is a good thing.
"Higher education" has become one of the biggest frauds of our time.
We have set up a system in which the "degree" has become essential to
all things. We push all our kids toward college, even if they don't qualify.
Employers are now requiring degrees even for routine tasks. Students are steered
into massive debt for many years to make the loan companies (and colleges)rich,
and when they wind up dropping out and default, penalties and interest boost the
debt sky high. Pretty soon you will need a "sanitary engineering"
degree to get a job cleaning toilets. People with degrees are now taking menial
jobs while those without are pushed to the unemployment line, where they have
given up. Many with degrees pay so much on loans that they would actually
pocket more at a non-degree job with no loan expenses. Thank you, Sallie Mae.
Why are costs up?One reason.Easy access to government
money through subsidized loans and Sally Mae.Higher education has
been turned into a bubble just like housing was not too long ago. Colleges and
Universities have caught on to how easy it is for students to get loans so they
just keep jacking up the price... and since everyone still thinks that you
*MUST* have a college degree to get anywhere in the professional world students
and parents are willing to pay these outrageous costs in order to get one. The colleges, text book companies and housing facilities have all gotten
in on the game... to the tune of billions in profits every year. Students come
out $20,000 to $50,000 in debt after 5 years at an average institution and they
think it's just the normal thing. Little do they know they'll be paying on those
loans for the rest of their lives. With interest rates at 10-20% financial
institutions are raking in the dough.Thankfully some students and
parents are catching on to this. They see the job market and realize that for
many people college will never pay off. Last time I checked only a third of
graduates were landing jobs in their field of study within two years of
graduation... that's pretty dismal. So what do we end up with? College grads
waiting tables or manning the register at Wal-Mart. Eventually the tide will
turn and enrollment rates will begin to fall. At that point institutions of
higher learning will have to lower costs or close the doors.
@Foxtrot: I hate to tell you, but the income disparity studies between grads and
non-grads were done 20 years ago or more. BEFORE the recession... back when
highly educated workers were still in demand.To my knowledge there
haven't been any studies of income disparity done since 2008. If there were I
would wager the numbers would be very different.
Have friends who had 13 children. In the year or so between finishing high
school an going on missions the boys in particular took courses such as heavy
equipment operators. On return from their missions they attended university and
had summer jobs that paid them up to 35 dollars an hour.Out of this
comes three doctors, one dentist and one MBA/CPA.The medical care
costs are an interesting factor. While at the Y, I broke my leg skiing. I head
a snap as the leg went by my ear an can remember hoping that it was my leg
(insured) and not my ski that was broken.
No puzzle here. The government provides loans that artificially inflate the
price of tuition. I don't know that my fellow-students or the private school
ever evaluated tuition based on average annual salary, demand for degrees, or
anything else. They knew Stafford loans paid 18,500 and so they charged 18,500
+ X. Any effort to reign in tuition can begin with reducing subsidies by
removing the government from the student loan game.Same with sky
rocketing medical costs. If you want costs to come down then get the government
out of the business of subsidizing medicine. In free markets, price
is determined by what the market can bear. Unqualified lending to un-screened
applicants, independent of their qualifications is exactly what got us into the
mess we are in today. And, I'll point out, that thanks to BO, the
government is the only game in town for student loans. That is crazy!!
@DeltaFoxtrot - funny what your name means.Fine I might be willing
to conceed that $1M is a bogey, but, even if it is off by an order of magnitude,
whatever. $3K for $100K? Ok. $3K for $500K? ok. I am not sure
why the costs are going up so quickly, there is undoubtedly waste to be cut, but
I am always amused at everyone thinking that everyone else is corrupt or stupid,
the mirror seems to never be looked at. Its obviously easier to throw stones.
I am also amused at the seemingly irrational connections. Sallie Mae = bad = "skyrocketing" costs of education (whatever that
means)Professors who are some of the most educated and talented people in
the world should work for? How much? So that is the reason. I
don't like Obama : US Government is bad: Corruption is inherent: People are
stupid: Why school costs are going up. Anyways. I always get
sucked into these conversations. I don't know why. Convincing people that
education is worth it, is probably a fools errand.
Re: "No worry Procuradorfiscal, about the leftists. They are counteracted
by the right-wingers . . . who've donated nearly $700,000 to USU.Not
even close! That $700K wouldn't hire enough conservative brainpower to
counteract 1% of the leftists at USU -- by comparison at least, a pretty
convervative institution.Of 1.2 million American "higher"
ed professors and instructors, 72% self-identify to the left of center, 15% to
the right. 50% reported registering Democrat, 5% Republican. No figures were
reported on registration as Communist-Workers, Democratic-Socialists,
Libertarians, or other fringe parties.Other studies suggest
academics substantially under-report left-leaning.So, suggestions
there are no legitimate worries about leftist bias in Big Ed ring a little
Just look at who gets hired as Presdients in Higher Ed.- all with steller
credentials in management (joking)- in Utah it appears last names help alot and
then we pay them substantial six figure salaries and ask for no real measure in
terms of an ROI for what we pay them- as long as they tell funny stories and
smile for alumni and say the right things we increase their salaries- but then
again I think that is exactly what The Regents desire
It is a fact University administrators and professors are left of center and
trying to get these folks to understand a profit motive and run a university
more like a business will be tough. I just wonder where the chief financial
officers of these institution are hiding, seriously if you did not make an
attempt to consolidate I.T. and purchasing accross the entire university,
you..CFO should be fired for being incompetent. THAT IS BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
The article didn't mention the relationship between tuition costs and state
appropriations for higher education. The legislature has a hand in this issue
also. At UVU, state appropriations amounted to over 60% of the budget as
recently as 2000-2001, whereas in 2010-2011 they were about 42%. This decrease
tends to push tuition upward.Nevertheless, UVU remains a bargain at
about $4600 per year (resident tuition + fees, 2011-2012).
Yeah, this article isn't worth reading, so I didn't. Yes costs have risen since
1980. While I think Universities, particularly state run ones charge students
way too much. I highly doubt that this article has taken into account,
inflation, supply and demand, rise in expected future wages, rises in the cost
of living and the increase in services universities provide. So the purpose of
the article? To get people fired up about a rise in costs that is perfectly
logical but to the non business savvy seems unfair and unreasonable. Sorry
things are more expensive now. A college education today costs more than in
1980, bottom line.
@Foxtrot: You are getting the idea... I still don't think that's quite right
though. Figure $3k per semester... two semesters per year... for 5 years
(average graduating time now). That's $30,000 just for tuition. Now figure in
housing, food and books for those 5 years... probably another $30,000. So you're
looking at $60,000 as the up front cost of a college education. Still not bad if you assume a college grad may make $500,000 more over a
lifetime. But wait... we're not factoring in compound interest on
those student loans for the 10-20 years that they will take to pay back. That
will easily stretch $60,000 into hundreds of thousands. What good is
an additional $500,000 over the course of a working life (40 years)... vs
$100,000 - $200,000 in college loan payments?Now we are looking at
making maybe an extra $400,000 over a 40 year career. That's $10,000 a year. So really, the statement should be "A college grad will make
$10,000/yr more than a non-grad." I'm not going to deny that
$10,000/yr is great, we'd all love an extra $10k/yr. But really in the end...
how much of a difference does it make? That looks a whole lot less significant
than the mythical $1M.And those are conservative estimates.
1. Anytime a third party payer is involved (health insurance, car insurance,
etc) costs skyrocket. Government is the third party payer for college.
Government imposes a huge regulatory burden on schools and eliminates any
incentive to address real issues.2. Public schools (K-12) sends about
$10,000 per student in my state (WA). This is equal to $300,000 for a classroom
of 30 kids and they still complain about education being underfunded. I think
it is way over funded.3.Public school teachers teach 5 to 6 hours each
day. University professors teach 6 to 10 hours a week in many cases. Professors
should be required to work for a living.4. Textbooks are a racket. Many
books are revised every couple of years for no purpose but to render the
previous revision obsolete and force the students to purchase new books. Many
professors publish their own texts and require their students to purchase them
at $100 + per copy. Professors should be required to write a text as a part of
their job so the state owns the intellectual property and then text books should
be revised only when they can be significantly improved.Private
industry innovates to reduce costs and deliver higher value. It is high time
higher education did the same.
1-am-1 Strongly recommend you actually read the article then post a comment. By
so doing you'll discover just how inane your comment really is.
Let's compare the costs of healthcare to college tuition costs over the last 40
or so years. What do they have in common other than both rapidly outpacing
inflation? I think the obvious factor is increased involvement by the Federal
Government. Why was that left out of the article? This article actually said
unlimited use of a copy machine? Seriously? To the writer's credit they
did mention increased college level bureaucracy to deal with the Federal
bureaucracy which goes back to my main point. Onward to the abyss!
"The Rock" said: "Government imposes a huge regulatory burden on
schools". What regulatory burden does the government place on
Stanford University and other private institutions (who, by the way, charge a
lot more for tuition than public institutions)?"Podunk"
said: It is a fact University administrators and professors are left of
center.Interesting. Since Phd's probably have higher average IQs than
non-Phd's, I wonder if there have been any studies correlating IQ and political
Over 410,000 foreign student visas were issued in 2010. That's enough foreign
students to fill 20 medium-sized university campuses. I believe the cost of
U.S. tuition would go down significantly if the number of foreign visa was
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments