In
my last post I suggested that the real scandal involving American universities
is not the admissions bribery by desperate parents but the inexplicable,
inexorable increases in university fees that are burying millions of students
under a mountain of debt.
I mentioned the case of a young
relative of mine who went to university in 1985 when tuition, room and board
amounted to about $15,000. Inflation between 1985 and 2019 averaged 2.54%. This means that an inflation-adjusted $15,000 in 1985 amounts to $35,238 in 2019.And yet many private, renowned, universities are now charging double that
amount. A year at Yale, for example, will now cost more than $70,000.
The only thing that shocks me is why
more parents aren’t demanding exactly how universities can justify increasing
their fees more than double the inflation rate. When do parents begin to revolt
and start examining very closely just what they’re getting for all that money,
start demanding that the universities make some radical changes, start looking
for more reasonable alternatives? Just how far have universities strayed from
their basic purpose of education and research?
Perhaps the first question is why it
takes four years to get a university degree. British universities take only
three years to deliver quality education. Think of the money that could be
saved if American universities squeezed more out of the year.
Another reality stands out clearly
with even a casual glance at any university’s glossy promotional brochure. They
have become far more than mere educational institutions. Along with teaching
and research they have become hospitality, entertainment and athletic
conglomerates – each piece of which is very, very expensive. This involves, of
course, increasing the university administration with more and more
non-academic deans, each of whom costs well over $100,000 when you include
their staff and expenses. Un-bundling the conglomerate structure could include a
cull of these non-academic administrators.
Take the hospitality part. It is
possible for the universities to sell some of their expensive living and dining
facilities to professional hospitality companies who would then offer that
accommodation to the students who would have the option of living there or
going elsewhere. Think of the immediate cash inflow and reduction of
maintenance expenses for the universities. Some alumni might scream to see
Marriott’s name engraved over the dormitory, but presumably some of those
savings would be passed on long-suffering parents.
The brochures also stress the
elaborate and extremely well-equipped student union/entertainment/gym centers.
Fine, but who pays for it. Again, wouldn’t the universities be financially
better off sub-contracting that business to professionals. Students who want to
use those facilities would pay extra, but the kid who never goes near them
would not be burdened with having part of his tuition used to fund those
centers.
And then there’s the very touchy
subject of athletics. Let’s take the Ivy League as an example. And I’m speaking
here as a former Ivy League varsity athlete. While they are by no means
national football and basketball powerhouses, Ivy League schools take athletics
very seriously indeed. It is not unusual, for example, for an Ivy League team
to bid for a national championship in sports like lacrosse, crew, or ice
hockey. A mid-sized Ivy League university offers about 30 men’s and women’s
intercollegiate athletic programs. Each of these teams has at least one --
usually more – coach in addition to equipment, medical insurance, travel
expenses, facility expenses, etc. Then there’s the Director of Athletics and
his/her staff. In short, it’s a very expensive business. Hard to justify why
any portion of the tuition for some kid who is tied to a physics lab all day
should go for this activity.
Don’t get me wrong. I love athletics
and enjoy a good football game as much as anyone. But when parents are
sacrificing so much to pay for their kids’ education there has to be a better
way to pay for them. I propose ending university financial support for athletics. Shift that burden to the
alumni/supporters willing to pay for them. Some schools have taken the first
step in this direction by establishing sports foundations that help fund a
broad range of athletic programs. I would go further an require all athletic funding to go through these
foundations. The university could maintain control/oversight of the foundation
to make sure the programs do not compromise the fundamental educational
principles of the university.
The football program of the University of Alabama-Birmingham offers a very interesting example. When the
president of UAB announced in late 2014 that the school was dropping football
there was a huge outcry. Over the next six months interested alumni, local business
leaders, county and state officials felt that the football program was so
important for the entire community that they raised enough money not just to
restore the program but to build a new stadium. This was a classic win/win.
Supporters got their football and the university could get back to what it is
supposed to do.
Universities could use some of the
savings from these cuts to increase their course program and pay professors
more. Instead, what many of schools are doing is hiring desperate post-grads on
one-year minimal-wage contracts, so-called 'adjunct professors'. It’s a little like a law firm charging a
client at a full partner’s rate only to have the actual work shunted off to a
low-paid (relatively) first year associate. Instead of getting professors
committed to teaching and/or research students face this revolving door of
one-year wonders who offer no long-term commitment. I wonder if parents even realize
just how much their kids are getting short-changed?
It all comes down to examining very
closely exactly what one wants from a university education. If you want the full
conglomerate package you’re free to pay for it. If, however, you want a more tailored
approach offering a high-quality educational experience without the extras
you’re going to have to look very, very hard. Maybe it’s time for some bright
entrepreneur to adapt the budget airline approach to education. Charge for
what’s important, but forget the in-flight snacks.
No comments:
Post a Comment